Scribd Logo
Загрузить

Добро пожаловать в Scribd!

  • Medical Malpractice: Do Not Overlook The Case Against The Manufacturer Representative Who Engaged in The Unauthorized Practice of Medicine

    Загружено:

    Irv Cantor
    19 просмотров1 страница
    Our law firm has noticed an alarmingly and rapidly growing trend in many patient charts we have reviewed: the presence of manufacturer representatives who have taken such active roles in the patient’s health care that their actions may constitute the unauthorized practice of medicine. More and more we have come across cases where the reps are actually counseling the patient on vital decisions regarding the patient’s health care and showing up in the operating room. We have even seen instances where the intra-operative notes indicate that the representative placed his or her hands on the patient during surgery. In some cases, the actions of the representative caused or contributed to the patient’s injury or death. In reviewing potential medical malpractice cases, the trial lawyer should not just consider the negligence of the traditional health care providers, but also the negligence of the manufacturer representative. Among the types of cases in which manufacturer representatives have been sued for the unauthorized practice of medicine or negligently performing assumed duties include orthopedic spine surgeries, orthopedic prosthetic (hip and knee) surgeries, cardiac stent and pacemaker procedures, and cosmetic laser surgeries. Most of the cases in which we have seen the presence of manufacturer representatives are orthopedic cases. Virginia Code Sections 54.1-2902 et. seq. prohibit the unauthorized practice of medicine. A patient harmed as a result of a manufacturer representative’s actions should consider bringing a suit against the representative for negligence per se in violating the aforementioned statute, as well as negligence in the discharge of duties voluntarily assumed. There may also be potential claims for breach of express warranties or implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose. In the situation in which the rep actually places his or her hands on the patient, a count for battery may also be brought. In Virginia, where there exists a cap on medical malpractice cases, a verdict obtained against a manufacturer representative who is not a “health care provider” as defined by the Virginia Medical Malpractice Act, seemingly may exceed the cap. The trial lawyer handling medical malpractice cases should not overlook cases against the manufacturer representative who has engaged in the unauthorized practice of medicine. Cantor Stoneburner Ford Grana & Buckner 7130 Glen Forest Drive Suite 400 Richmond VA 23226 1-800-648-1488 virginiatrialfirm.com Icantor@virginiatrialfirm.com

    Оригинальное название

    Medical Malpractice: Do Not Overlook the Case Against the Manufacturer Representative Who Engaged in the Unauthorized Practice of Medicine

    Авторское право

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Доступные форматы

    DOC, PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

    Этот документ был вам полезен?

    Это неприемлемый материал?

    Пожаловаться на этот документ
    Our law firm has noticed an alarmingly and rapidly growing trend in many patient charts we have reviewed: the presence of manufacturer representatives who have taken such active roles in the patient’s health care that their actions may constitute the unauthorized practice of medicine. More and more we have come across cases where the reps are actually counseling the patient on vital decisions regarding the patient’s health care and showing up in the operating room. We have even seen instances where the intra-operative notes indicate that the representative placed his or her hands on the patient during surgery. In some cases, the actions of the representative caused or contributed to the patient’s injury or death. In reviewing potential medical malpractice cases, the trial lawyer should not just consider the negligence of the traditional health care providers, but also the negligence of the manufacturer representative. Among the types of cases in which manufacturer representatives have been sued for the unauthorized practice of medicine or negligently performing assumed duties include orthopedic spine surgeries, orthopedic prosthetic (hip and knee) surgeries, cardiac stent and pacemaker procedures, and cosmetic laser surgeries. Most of the cases in which we have seen the presence of manufacturer representatives are orthopedic cases. Virginia Code Sections 54.1-2902 et. seq. prohibit the unauthorized practice of medicine. A patient harmed as a result of a manufacturer representative’s actions should consider bringing a suit against the representative for negligence per se in violating the aforementioned statute, as well as negligence in the discharge of duties voluntarily assumed. There may also be potential claims for breach of express warranties or implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose. In the situation in which the rep actually places his or her hands on the patient, a count for battery may also be brought. In Virginia, where there exists a cap on medical malpractice cases, a verdict obtained against a manufacturer representative who is not a “health care provider” as defined by the Virginia Medical Malpractice Act, seemingly may exceed the cap. The trial lawyer handling medical malpractice cases should not overlook cases against the manufacturer representative who has engaged in the unauthorized practice of medicine. Cantor Stoneburner Ford Grana & Buckner 7130 Glen Forest Drive Suite 400 Richmond VA 23226 1-800-648-1488 virginiatrialfirm.com Icantor@virginiatrialfirm.com

    Авторское право:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Скачайте в формате DOC, PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd
    Отметить как неприемлемый контент
    19 просмотров1 страница

    Medical Malpractice: Do Not Overlook The Case Against The Manufacturer Representative Who Engaged in The Unauthorized Practice of Medicine

    Загружено:

    Irv Cantor
    Our law firm has noticed an alarmingly and rapidly growing trend in many patient charts we have reviewed: the presence of manufacturer representatives who have taken such active roles in the patient’s health care that their actions may constitute the unauthorized practice of medicine. More and more we have come across cases where the reps are actually counseling the patient on vital decisions regarding the patient’s health care and showing up in the operating room. We have even seen instances where the intra-operative notes indicate that the representative placed his or her hands on the patient during surgery. In some cases, the actions of the representative caused or contributed to the patient’s injury or death. In reviewing potential medical malpractice cases, the trial lawyer should not just consider the negligence of the traditional health care providers, but also the negligence of the manufacturer representative. Among the types of cases in which manufacturer representatives have been sued for the unauthorized practice of medicine or negligently performing assumed duties include orthopedic spine surgeries, orthopedic prosthetic (hip and knee) surgeries, cardiac stent and pacemaker procedures, and cosmetic laser surgeries. Most of the cases in which we have seen the presence of manufacturer representatives are orthopedic cases. Virginia Code Sections 54.1-2902 et. seq. prohibit the unauthorized practice of medicine. A patient harmed as a result of a manufacturer representative’s actions should consider bringing a suit against the representative for negligence per se in violating the aforementioned statute, as well as negligence in the discharge of duties voluntarily assumed. There may also be potential claims for breach of express warranties or implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose. In the situation in which the rep actually places his or her hands on the patient, a count for battery may also be brought. In Virginia, where there exists a cap on medical malpractice cases, a verdict obtained against a manufacturer representative who is not a “health care provider” as defined by the Virginia Medical Malpractice Act, seemingly may exceed the cap. The trial lawyer handling medical malpractice cases should not overlook cases against the manufacturer representative who has engaged in the unauthorized practice of medicine. Cantor Stoneburner Ford Grana & Buckner 7130 Glen Forest Drive Suite 400 Richmond VA 23226 1-800-648-1488 virginiatrialfirm.com Icantor@virginiatrialfirm.com

    Авторское право:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Скачайте в формате DOC, PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd
    Отметить как неприемлемый контент
    из 1

    Medical Malpractice: Do Not Overlook the Case Against the Manufacturer Representative Who Engaged in the Unauthorized ractice

    of Medicine
    3.5.14 Our law firm has noticed an alarmingly and rapidly growing trend in many patient charts we have reviewed: the presence of manufacturer representatives who have taken such active roles in the patients health care that their actions may constitute the unauthorized practice of medicine. ore and more we have come across cases where the reps are actually counseling the patient on vital decisions regarding the patients health care and showing up in the operating room. !e have even seen instances where the intra"operative notes indicate that the representative placed his or her hands on the patient during surgery. #n some cases$ the actions of the representative caused or contri%uted to the patients in&ury or death. #n reviewing potential medical malpractice cases$ the trial lawyer should not &ust consider the negligence of the traditional health care providers$ %ut also the negligence of the manufacturer representative. 'mong the types of cases in which manufacturer representatives have %een sued for the unauthorized practice of medicine or negligently performing assumed duties include orthopedic spine surgeries$ orthopedic prosthetic (hip and knee) surgeries$ cardiac stent and pacemaker procedures$ and cosmetic laser surgeries. ost of the cases in which we have seen the presence of manufacturer representatives are orthopedic cases. *irginia +ode ,ections 54.1"-./- et. se0. prohi%it the unauthorized practice of medicine. ' patient harmed as a result of a manufacturer representatives actions should consider %ringing a suit against the representative for negligence per se in violating the aforementioned statute$ as well as negligence in the discharge of duties voluntarily assumed. 1here may also %e potential claims for %reach of e2press warranties or implied warranties of fitness for a particular purpose. #n the situation in which the rep actually places his or her hands on the patient$ a count for %attery may also %e %rought. #n *irginia$ where there e2ists a cap on medical malpractice cases$ a verdict o%tained against a manufacturer representative who is not a 3health care provider4 as defined %y the *irginia edical alpractice 'ct$ seemingly may e2ceed the cap. 1he trial lawyer handling medical malpractice cases should not overlook cases against the manufacturer representative who has engaged in the unauthorized practice of medicine. Cantor !tone"urner #ord $rana % &uckner 513/ 6len 7orest 8rive ,uite 4// 9ichmond *' -3--: 1";//":4;"14;; virginiatrialfirm.com #cantor<virginiatrialfirm.com

    Вам также может понравиться