Through the many events that have taken place in the health care industry one that comes to mind is how excessive litigation affecting health care today. Litigation has become so broad that it has become a specialized department in the law industry. When one watches television, listens to the radio, browses the Internet, or looks at other media outlets he or she is bound to come across some advertisements for litigations against health care facilities and professionals at frequent intervals. It is not unexpected to see or hear several of them throughout the day. Law firms have even become specialized in health care related cases and focus on specific conditions caused by some sort of illness, medication, or even procedure. The result of this is that health care facilities close due to the financial burden of payments resulting from litigations, in the long run the amount paid for malpractice insurance rises, insurance premiums rise, and costs of health care increases because of the additional procedures ordered to try to prevent litigation (Satiani, 2004). The practice of defensive medicine is estimated to cost two and a half times average coverage cost and the estimated savings in tort reform is passed in 50 billion dollars…
Have you ever followed a court case and been astonished at the outcome and the damages awarded in the case? I believe we have all heard about cases where the plaintiff is awarded a very large sum of money for a case that appears not to warrant the award. Most of these scenarios take place in cases where the tort law applies. According to authors Kubasek, Brennan and Browne (2009), tort law is defined as injury that to a person or their property. Tort law is primarily a state law and stipulations can vary. Tort law was put in place to encourage civility, discourage people and companies from private retaliation and to compensate innocent people who are injured due to the wrongful act of a person or company. According to The Legal Environment of Business A Critical Thinking Approach, there are different types of damages awarded in relation to tort cases. These damages are nominal, which is usually awarded when the plaintiff has not suffered serious damage, compensatory, which include general and special damages, and punitive damages. Punitive damages are usually intended to punish defendants and often go beyond simply compensating the plaintiff. (Kubasek et al.,2009)…
The tort system provides compensation to individuals who have been wronged or injured by the activity of another individual. Until the Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Jones v. Tsige in 2012, resulting in the creation of the tort of intrusion upon seclusion, the common law did not include torts that did not entail a personal or financial injury. It is essential the common law includes torts that do not entail actual injury to provide individuals the means of seeking remedies when they are wronged from the wrongdoer responsible for the action.…
reduce the cost of malpractice lawsuits, defensive medicine and the lack of justice for injured…
Briefly describe what has happened to the size and composition of the legal profession over the last few decades.…
“The case, Reilly v. St. Charles Hospital, centered on the birth of Shannon Reilly in 2002. The jury determined that the Long Island hospital and the obstetric nurse had failed to properly monitor the pregnant mother and her fetus, missed important signs that the baby was in distress, and then failed to take corrective action” (Cohen 2013)…
Due to the number of assumed meritless cases in the United States the Tort Reform movement was born to propose reducing tort litigation and damages. The advocates on this reform says that small businesses are suffering much like how the Chungs, who had to close their business because of the financial strain that the case caused them, and critics of the reform states that “ it is movement that seeks to strip Americans of their legal rights” (History, 2011). A closer look at the statistics and unbiased research of the two cases will truly determine whether the cases have any merit or not.…
The fifth chapter of “Full tort press: media coverage of civil litigation”, William Haltom and Michael McCann explains the issue of the legal system, and how it plays a role in the media. The development of a successful newsworthy story brought quite the attention towards the issue of lawyers, as everything might not seem the way it truly looks. The appeal of media coverage truly showcases how everything is seen in their eyes, as profit and a great story is their main goal. Haltom and McCann continue with chapter six of “Java Jive: Genealogy of a Juridical icon” as the issue continues with the “McDonald’s hot coffee” case, and how 2.9 million dollars was rewarded for spilling the drink on herself. The media continues to be concerned about the…
3) How were the elements of intentional infliction of emotional distress applied to that case? In other words, explain why the court concluded that there was enough evidence to establish intentional…
1. Smiley, a buyer for Carrefour Fashions, entered the store of a rival firm, Boulevard Boutique, in order to find out what latest lines they were carrying. He was recognized by Maldini, the manager of Boulevard Boutique, who called the store detective, Rocco, and ordered him to “keep an eye” on Smiley while he, Maldini, called the police.…
tort law deals with conduct that leads to injuries not considered acceptable by societal standards…
In the past several years, the focus surrounding tort law has grown significantly. Why all the attention? Most people say it is because of the increase insurance liability and the recent up rise in ridiculous lawsuits. One of the most recognizable suits out there is the infamous “McDonald’s Hot Coffee” Lawsuit. This well known lawsuit sparked controversy and propelled tort law into the public eye. The term tort is defined as “Damage, injury, or a wrongful act done willfully, negligently, or in circumstances involving strict liability, but not involving breach of contract, for which a civil suit can be brought” (thefreedictionary.com). While there has been plenty of attention regarding tort law, there has been just as much attention focused on tort reform. “Tort reform is a movement to reshape the way consumers can access the courts by restricting their right to sue and limiting the awards they could receive” (Crane).…
Tort reform, being one of those platforms, is proposed as one solution to the rapidly increasing health care cost in the United States. Careful reform of medical malpractice laws can lower administrative costs and health spending. This will also lead to improved patient safety and steer physicians away from the costly practice of defensive medicine.…
Defensive medicine is when providers prescribed unnecessary medicines and services to avoid liability rather than for the benefit of the patient. According to the study, the Congressional Budget Office then estimated that implementing tort reform would reduce total health care spending by about $11 billion and would reduce federal budget deficits by as much as $54 billion (Congressional documents and Publications, 2013). In addition, using a dataset of health plans representing over 10 million Americans annually between 1998 and 2006, the study found that the most common set of tort reforms during this period reduces premiums of employer-sponsored self-insured health plans by 2.1% (Avraham & Schanzenbach0. However, many argued that Tort reform did not cut health care cost. In article titled “Tort reform' didn't cut health care costs in Texas, study finds”, states that health care spending has increased annually everywhere, including in the states with caps on malpractice payouts and that Medicare payments to doctors in Texas rose 1 to 2 percent faster than the rest of the country (Roser,…
It is all about personal viewpoints. All it takes is one misunderstood detail to blow a case out of proportion. Reporters use facts from cases that can be interpreted in many different ways. These humorous and minute details are used to get publicity and are tarnishing the reputation of civil lawsuits. Lawsuits are very beneficial for the relationship between consumers and companies. It lets the companies know what consumers do and do not want from their company. There is a definite need for the tort reform, but no need to get rid of civil lawsuits all together. Putting caps on rewards should be enough. Getting rid of civil lawsuits would only anger the public. Every citizen has the right to speak his or her mind, even if it may seem petty. Being able to speak their mind is important to most people in society these days. If people received less in punitive damages, but were at least able to continue to file lawsuits, then there should not be that big of an issue. With having the tort reform, a large amount of money could be saved. There are a ton of other strategies to help the justice system save money. Taking out civil lawsuit could save money, but would hurt the economy in many other ways. Limiting lawsuits is not the answer to saving the economy…