More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on evidence based practice
Evidence based practice relating to health care
Evidence based practice relating to health care
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
An overtime class action lawsuit was filed against a California hospice and palliative care group known as Seasons. The lawsuit includes allegations that the defendants, Seasons Hospice and Palliative Care Group of California, Inc. refused to pay the plaintiffs in the case appropriate overtime pay as required by labor law. In addition, plaintiffs claim that the hospice and palliative care group failed to offer required rest periods and meal breaks as outlined in the California Labor Code. Basic overtime wages for non-exempt employees of Seasons Hospice and Palliative Care of California, Inc. are not in question/are not in dispute.
Case Citation: Gallagher v. Cayuga Medical Center 151 AD 3d 1349 - NY: Appellate Div., 3rd Dept. 2017 Background: In this civil case Timothy W. Gallagher is the appellant, and Cayuga Medical Center (CMC) is the respondents. The case took place in the appellate division of the supreme court of New York, division three. The plaintiff’s complaint was that Cayuga Medical Center had asserted medical malpractice, negligence, wrongful death and emotional distressed.
Read Case 10-2, Welge v. Planters Lifesavers, on page 243. What theory of liability did Justice Posner use in finding the defendant liable? Judge Posner used the strict product liability theory in finding the defendant liable (Herron, 2011). Under the strict product liability theory, K-Mart (seller) would be held liable for defects in their products even if those defects were not introduced by them; also for failing to discover them during production (Herron, 2011).
In the Shea v. Esensten case, there was a lot of information that was compared to different laws. “Mr. Shea's doctor persuaded Mr. Shea, who was then forty years old, that he was too young and did not have enough symptoms to justify a visit to a cardiologist. A few months later, Mr. Shea died of heart failure” (Shea v. Esensten, 1997). The given information brought into question, why would the doctor not make a referral for Mr. Shea? “Mr. Shea had been an employee of Seagate Technologies, Inc. (Seagate) for many years.
11. Similarly the reasoning for the refusal to disclose Dr. Rigney’s radiological reviews is equally misleading. While Plaintiff appreciates that Defendant Medic East has advised the court that Dr. Rigney will not be called as a witness in the instant matter, an admission Plaintiff intends to enforce should Defendant Medic East suddenly change their mind later, it does not change the fact that said reports were supplied to Dr.
Case: 791 F2d 189 Thompson Medical Co. Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission Facts: This case concerns a complaint brought by the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC" or "Commission") against petitioner Thompson Medical Company under Secs. The Commission ordered Thompson to refrain from making unsubstantiated claims that Aspercreme is effective and to disclose in the product 's labeling and advertising that it does not contain aspirin. Thompson challenges the FTC 's order as arbitrary and capricious, contrary to public policy, unsupported by substantial evidence, and discordant with applicable Commission precedent.
This patient was not treated with the ethical respectany patient should receive when seeking help/treatment. It is very alarming that a physician whose job is to take care of other humans would disregard giving a proper
Both victims sued Centennial Hills Hospital in civil court, claiming the hospital knew or should have know Mr. Farmer was a threat. One case was settled without going to trial in 2013. The other victim committed suicide in 2013, but her claim is still being
Doshi, 2017). Doshi was able to support the fact that it had limited responsibility in the patient’s care, by performing and interpreting the sonogram and thus the motion for summary judgment was properly granted (Neyman v. Doshi, 2017). In the case against Sorkin, the plaintiff’s burden in proving medical malpractice was only to bring enough evidence that a reasonable person could deduct that it was more likely than not that injury was caused by the defendant (Neyman v. Doshi, 2017). The main supporting factor that lost the case for Sorkin was the fact that he could not refute the suggestion by the plaintiff’s expert that if chemotherapy would have been initiated sooner, then that patient’s outcome could have been better (Neyman v. Doshi, 2017). Had perhaps the patient been diagnosed and treatment began earlier her chance of recovery could have increased and the incidence of suffering reduced; therefore Sorkin diminished the patient’s chance of an improved outcome (Neyman v. Doshi,
In the case of Abbott Laboratories v. Portland Retail Druggists, the respondent brought an antitrust action against Abbott Laboratories claiming that they had violated the Robinson-Patman Act. The pharmaceutical manufacturers had sold drugs to not-for-profit hospitals at lower prices then to the commercial pharmacies (Showalter, pg 452). The Robinson-Patman Act of 1936, which was an amendment to the Clayton Antitrust Act (Elfand, n.d.), had made it unlawful to discriminate by placing a pricing difference between buyers of similar goods, when “the effect of such discrimination may be substantially to lessen competition” (Abbott Laboratories v. Portland Retail Druggists, 1976). As the petitioners, Abbott Laboratories claimed that the price
After reading this case I was terribly shocked about the fact that something like this could happen in our medical history. I couldn’t believe how a patient could be neglected so much. Based on the material that we have learned the lack of ethical theory of deontology in Dr. Evan was disturbing. As a doctor Dr. Evan’s role is to care for patients, keep them away from harm and prolong their life. Though in the trial he stated as if he didn’t care.
An unsatisfied John Moore Based on the case “Moore v. Regents of the University of California” By Lani Marais 210013877 5 May 2016 An unsatisfied John Moore (Stanfill, 2012) John Moore is a cancer patient, from Seattle, that was diagnosed with hairy cell leukemia in 1976. After he underwent surgery to remove his spleen, which was damaged by the cancer, he started to wonder if his doctor, Dr David Golde, was withholding information from him. He started to suspect this after a few follow-up visits. Golde was flying him to Los Angeles every month for seven years, when there was no noticeable reason for John to be in Dr Golde’s laboratory.
This is because the time frame after was from so long ago that there was not going to be much evidence presented to prove them “guilty.” The laws were so different back then that cases such as this would be hard to prove. Overall, because of this time period, the medical field took advantage of an individual. Disregarding the time period, any medical field should not take any opportunity that makes them take advantage of one’s given human
Health Care Law: Tort Case Study Carolann Stanek University of Mary Health Care Law: Tort Case Study A sample case study reviewed substandard care that was delivered to Ms. Gardner after having sustained an accident and brought to Bay Hospital for treatment. Dr. Dick, a second-year pediatric resident, was on that day in the ED and provided care for Ms. Gadner. Dr. Moon, is the chief of staff and oversees the credentialing of all physicians at Bay Hospital.
The court found the “Defendant's care of Claimant fell below acceptable standards of practice” (Stashenko, 2015). In 2009 a former inmate of the Hawaii corrections department was awarded close to $1 million in damages for an incident in 2003, in which the physician’s failure to give the correct type and dosage of antibiotic for an infection in his scrotum. This resulted in 6 subsequent surgeries and the removal of his scrotum, rendering him
