If You Don’t, Who Will?

Vicarious Liability: Naming a Hospital as Defendant

Posted by on Oct 21, 2016 in Medical Malpractice | 0 comments

The Institute of Medicine, a nonprofit organization, published a report, titled “To Err Is Human,” in 1999. In the report, it was said that during the 1990s, about 98,000 people died due to preventable medical errors committed by healthcare providers (nurses, doctors and hospitals).

Continuous research, training plus the introduction of modern medical devices were seen as the means to significantly reduce, if not totally end, fatal medical mistakes; however, instead of lowering the number of deaths, fatalities only increased, almost doubling even. Patient deaths in Medicare alone reached 180,000 in 2010, all due to bad hospital care, according to the Office of the Inspector General for Health and Human Services.

Medical professionals have a significant responsibility towards patients under their care. If they fail to provide the standard of care expected of them and cause harm to patients, especially due to negligence or carelessness, then they can be held legally liable.

Liability in a tort (or personal injury) case can result to a person being held responsible for the actions committed, or not performed, by someone else. If applied in a workplace setting, it would mean an employer being held accountable for the actions of his/her employee (or failure to perform some necessary action/s), provided that it can be proven that the employee’s action or lack of action occurred during such employee’s course of employment. Under the law, this is known as vicarious liability.

Vicarious liability, which is often applied in medical malpractice lawsuits, makes hospital negligence the basis of a lawsuit. This move is often resorted to by personal injury or medical malpractice lawyers knowing that the healthcare professional, who committed the injurious mistake, will not be able to afford the full amount of compensation sought by his/her victim. The hospital where the healthcare professional is employed, however, can lean on its insurance carrier to pay the amount that the court will approve. Thus, instead of naming the healthcare professional as defendant in a lawsuit, the defendant becomes the hospital. Besides the purpose of seeking compensation, naming the hospital as defendant is also aimed at sending a message to the hospital owner/s and manager/s: make sure that quality care is always provided to patients in order to prevent further committance of mistakes that will harm patients and make them suffer more.

According to Toronto medical malpractice lawyers, in medical malpractice law, negligence refers to caregivers doing something they should not have done, or not doing something they should have done, measured against the reasonable treatment that should have been done in the circumstances. For a victim of medical malpractice to merit the compensation that he/she seeks from the liable party, he/she must be able to prove to the court that the caregiver’s conduct fell below the standard of care to which he/she, as a patient, is entitled.

Read More

Filing A Social Security Disability Claim

Posted by on Jul 27, 2016 in Uncategorized | 0 comments

If you are attempting to file a social security disabilities claim, you are doing so in order to attain the support that you need in lieu of being unable to work; however, working through the application to do so can become so overly-complicated, it feels like a job itself. This can be highly disheartening when the benefits you need to support yourself and your family are out of reach due to nothing more than a lack of understanding of the system on which it operates on.

The benefits that you seek through a Social Security Disability claim are critical to the upkeep of you and your family’s well being.

Common Application Mishaps

According to its annual report, the Social Security Administration received upwards of 2.5 million applications for the program in 2015, but the unfortunate reality is that more applicants are denied than granted the benefits they are applying for. Although there is the option to take your claim case to a hearing upon denial, the waiting process to actually appear in court can take up to a year or longer. Why are so many applicants denied? According to the website of John Michael Bailey Injury Lawyers, one chief reason is simply due to incorrectly or insufficiently filled out applications. The SSDI places a great deal of responsibility on the applicant to get it right the first time and to send all necessary materials to the right people. Failure to do so will quickly push your application to the denial pile. Some common pitfalls of applicants are:

-Not including enough (recent) medical records proving your disability
-Not attending the doctor regularly in the months leading up to application so as to have recent medical records
-Not re-submitting medical records with the second packet of forms that is sent to you after you turn in your application to avoid being waylaid
-Not obtaining an RFC (Residual Functional Capacity form) from your treating doctor, which is needed before you can be approved
-Not acting within two months in requesting an appeal upon denial

These are only some of the few more broad, hard to miss type of mistakes that exist to be made throughout the application process- there are many more tedious details that, unless you know exactly what you’re doing or have experience filling out the form, you are sure to miss or complete incorrectly, resulting in denial.

Read More

Differentiating Assisted Living and Nursing Home

Posted by on Mar 28, 2016 in Retirement Care | 0 comments

When we are presented with a situation where our loved ones, especially the elderly, need special care that we are not able to provide ourselves, we often think of sending them to a home facility, according to SeniorAdvice.com. Usually, people associate it with nursing homes. While that is not uncommon to contemplate on, we might just be mistaking nursing homes for assisted living homes. These two kinds of care facilities cater to the elderly, but they have monumental differences which we should not overlook. This way, we can give our loved ones the best care they deserve while also being efficient, especially in costs. According to the New York State Office for the Aging, there are over 1.25 million seniors over the age of 75 in New York alone.

Assisted living provides assistance to the elderly while they are doing their daily tasks, such as bathing, eating, and dressing up. It could easily mean an alternative for the elder’s actual home. Typically, assisted living homes are equipped with social centers where the residents could interact with their fellow residents in order to not feel isolated. Assisted living homes provide a healthier environment to make the elder’s daily life more lively. Sometimes, families in the country move their elders to assisted living mainly for easy access to socialization, which is an important aspect in anyone’s life.

Nursing homes, on the other hand, are geared towards a specific goal. They have doctors and nurses who will attend to the health needs required by the patient. Usually, residents in nursing homes are those who have ailments that need to be monitored crucially. According to caring.com, nursing homes are more like hospitals, in the sense that its focus is the medical needs of the patient, as opposed to assisted living homes which is a normal home that provides community involvement for the elder.

Before deciding which one to choose for your loved ones, make sure that you have carefully reviewed the facts and the differences between nursing homes and assisted living homes. Doing this could mean that you will be able to save more money by giving only what is actually needed and so that you may avoid availing services that will be irrelevant to your elder’s needs.

Read More

Changing Child Restraints after an Accident

Posted by on Nov 1, 2015 in Personal Injury | 0 comments

As stated on the website of the Hankey Law Office, a company focusing on personal injuries, regardless of how defensively we may drive, there are various ways the actions of others could cause a vehicle wreck and leave victims facing a multitude of difficulties in the aftermath of an accident.

Accident rates that are recent imply that each person is likely to be concerned about 4 injuries in their lifetime. There are millions of injuries every year. Hundreds of thousands are hurt, and hundreds of these injuries are severe. Actually, in accordance with the most recent data, of the close to 6 thousand documented accidents in the year 2012, the NHTSA says 644,000 were killed in these injuries and that more than 6,000 passengers were hurt. Fortunately, injury rates and the cheapest vehicle incident death are some of the youngsters ages under and 9. Most the reduced prices might be attributed to child safety limitations. Nevertheless, after a collision, lots of people do not comprehend why these limitations may have to be replaced.

Based on the NHTSA, it is recommended that child-safety restraints be changed after an accident that is considered to be moderate to intense. The people suggest that performing ensures that the kid will go through the best level of safety in case the strength of the seat was undermined in a previous accident.

A kid’s seat might also have to be changed following a slight accident. But the NHTSA does not absolutely imply that that is necessary. According to one study performed by the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, all chairs tested that sustained minor damage in accidents up to 30 mph continued to meet with all national specifications even with being associated with four more accidents. The study thus reasoned that there were no instances where a child’s safety chair was ruined in a minor accident.

As stated by the NHTSA, a minor crash must meet with ALL of these criteria:
The vehicle could be driven from the accident site;
The vehicle door nearest the security seat was unchanged;
There have been no injuries to any of the car passengers;
The air bags (if present) didn’t deploy; AND
There’s no visible harm to the security seat.

Read More

What Are the Consequences of Burn Injuries?

Posted by on Jun 29, 2015 in Personal Injury | 0 comments

Many do not wish to be reminded about how fragile they truly are. As a matter of fact, it can all just fade away into the distant ether – this slice of time and now that we call life – and we can all pop away, forgotten, like breath on a mirror. This has never been more evident if you have suffered a traumatic injury that almost injured you to the point of death – and there are very few injuries that are sometimes far, far worse than it: burn injuries being one of them.

Human skin is an organ – this is something that tends to be forgotten – and it is also one of the toughest and most vulnerable parts of the body. If it were to come into contact with fire, there are parts of it that will never heal nor will ever feel ever again. Victims of burn injuries are often left horribly scarred and disfigured – meaning that victims often have to deal with not only the physical injury but also the emotional trauma that comes with being scarred and ostracized from society by being scarred.

There are many expenses that come with being injured by fire as it requires immediate medical action, thereby resulting in numerous expenses in an attempt to repair and heal the skin as best as modern science can. Therapy may also be needed in order for the victim to properly cope with the trauma of having been burnt as it could trigger mental illnesses such as depression, anxiety, or even PTSD – as extremely traumatic events are wont to do. The victim may also lose wages due to being unable to work, sometimes become disabled due to the burn injury itself. It is a terrible, terrible thing to suffer from.

The immediate treatment and action following a burn injury could mean everything. Click here to find out more about you can do, should you or someone you know suffer from a burn injury.

Read More

Types of Recovery for Personal Injury

Posted by on Mar 29, 2015 in Personal Injury | 0 comments

There are many kinds of recovery for personal injury due to negligence. The applicable type and the amount of recovery will depend on the cause and nature of the injury, as well as applicable state laws. It may be limited to an amount that will just cover actual medical expenses, or it may also include non-economic damages such as pain and suffering.

Some types of recovery:

Disfigurement – usually involving permanent scars and other effects on a person’s appearance, which may have emotional or psychological impacts. In some cases, such as for models or those whose career depends on personal appearance, the damages may include loss of income.

Future medical expenses – if the plaintiff will require additional surgery, required to have special devices or aids, lifelong care, or ongoing medication and rehabilitation, the defendant may be required to pay the estimated costs based on the recommendations or diagnosis of the attending physician

Loss of consortium – this refers to any effects that an injury or death may have on the benefits of married life. This includes the loss of affection, companionship, solace, sexual relations, society, and assistance. This may be claimed by the uninjured spouse as well.

Loss of enjoyment – this may be part of general damages or pain and suffering. It is hard to put a monetary value on how the injury affects the normal “pleasures” that an individual may derive from life if not for the injury

Loss of earning capacity/wages – this is mainly an economic recovery that is calculated based on the age, health, life expectancy, skills and experience of the injured or deceased party. If the victim has past earnings, this may be used as a basis for calculating the final recovery, but a jury is allowed to calculate the potential earnings of even a child who has never been employed if not for the injury

There are many other types of recovery for a victim of personal injury. If you sustained serious injury because of the negligence of a third party, you could be eligible for compensation. Consult with a personal injury lawyer in your area to view more about what kinds of options you have.

Read More

The Legal Right of an Individual to File a Tort Suit against His/Her Own Spouse

Posted by on Jan 30, 2015 in Marriage | 0 comments

It was not until the latter half of the 19th century, when the Married Women’s Property Acts or Married Women’s Acts was passed into law, that some US states began to slowly terminate the common law unity of a husband and a wife and recognize the legal rights of married women, allowing them, henceforth, to contract, hold and defend their property interests and, most importantly, to sue their husband for whatever legal reasons (many other legal rights of married women were, of course, recognized during this time).

Prior to this, the legal existence of women, by virtue of her marriage, was either suspended or consolidated into that of her husband, under whose person she got her identity and the right to perform all other things. Thus, in case someone were to file a lawsuit against her, then it will be her husband who will be the defendant; in the same manner, if she were the one to pursue a legal case against another, then it will be her husband who will act as the plaintiff.

This marital condition, wherein the legal identity of a couple was placed totally in the person of the husband, was called a woman’s “coverture.” And, due to the spousal unity or single legal identity of a husband and wife, the doctrine of interspousal immunity, the common law that forbade spouses from filing tort lawsuits against one another, became to be accepted. Based on this doctrine, a married woman can never sue her husband for reasons of personal injury (resulting from negligence) since it would be absurd for the husband to be both plaintiff and defendant simultaneously; in other words it is unthinkable that a husband would file a personal injury lawsuit against himself.

Between 1920 and 1940 many US courts began the partial abolition of interspousal immunity – a result of the increased and broader reading (and deeper understanding) of the Married Women’s Acts. Despite this bold move initiated by some states, many persevered in recognizing the common law doctrine, rationalizing that: while an interspousal tort lawsuit would certainly only disrupt marital tranquility, immunity will surely preserve marital harmony; spouses may only connive to engage in fraudulent liability insurance claims; instead of filing a tort suit, an injured spouse should rather pursue divorce or a criminal charge as alternative remedy.

Though these arguments prevailed in many courts in the past, many also began abandoning these eventually, so that by 1970 majority of US states began allowing intentional tort suits which pit spouses against each other. While the rule of immunity may still be observed in specific situations, its abolition in the area of tortuous suits is already total. To date, Louisiana is the only state that has retained the doctrine of interspousal tort immunity.

Read More