Direct cause; the person has to show that the damages were a direct cause to the injury or death. Damages; the person has to prove that there were sufficient damages they endured related to the physician. The first one is duty; the patient just has to show that there was a patient and physician relationship that existed. Clearly she can prove that there was a patient and physician relationship. The physician did perform an exploratory laparotomy on her for a small bowel obstruction after the patient came in complaining of severe abdominal pain.
In order for him to be compensated, he had to show the court that the injuries to his wife were caused by Dr. Hilbuns’ neglect. He filed a malpractice/wrongful death action against Dt. Hilbun alleging that he failed to inquire about Hall’s post-operation recovery and failed to give appropriate post-operative instructions to the nursing staff (Hall v. Hilbun, Supreme Court of Mississippi, 466 So. 2d 856 (1985)). Dr. Hoerr was called by Halls’ husband as an expert witness in trial.
The four remaining owners suffered a loss when the bar was destroyed due to Coleman’s actions. 3) Should Software Inc. be held liable for damages caused by Coleman in the suit brought by John? John was struck in the eye by Coleman and suffered severe eye damage. 4) Was Coleman a victim of wrongful termination? Coleman was terminated without an exit interview as required by Software Inc’s handbook.
New Horizon’s defense was that the aide's action of slapping Rodebush was against the nursing home's policy and had not been suggested as a method of blocking the combativeness of an Alzheimer's patient. The jury’s verdict was in favor of the plaintiff Glen Rodebush on both theories of negligence and willful misconduct, awarding him $50,000.00 in actual damages and $1,200,000.00 in punitive
Smitty is at fault for those statements and is liable. 4) Damages, or some harm caused to the person or entity who is the subject of the statement. As a result of Smitty’s lie stating she was wearing a Jakes Gym T-Shirt and endorsed his gym, Marilyn lost her scholarship since it was a violation of NCAA rules. Marilyn lost out on the scholarship money earmarked for the third and fourth year of
Treatment consists of diazepam, 10–20 mg intravenously, repeated every 5 minutes as needed until the patient is calm, and correction of fluid and electrolyte abnormalities and hypoglycemia. The total requirement for
June 20 , 2001 Andrea Yates shocked a nation as news stations aired stories proclaiming that she had taken the lives of her five children .As details unfolded over the next few months and stories would surface that revealed Mrs . Yates had a long history of mental illness . Numerous people have admitted guilt , expressing their shame and apologies for assuming the children were safe . Opinions of many believe that Russell Yates simply looked the other way , allowing his wife to have control and ultimately end the lives of his children . His character was consistently scrutinized over the course of the trial , only to be defended by family members .
Genetically induced psychotic behaviors caused Yates to commit a heinous crime without remorse and receive a lesser sentence in criminal court. Genetic Evidence and Psychological Factors in Criminal Behavior Biology plays a major role in the case of Andrea Yates. Although unknown to Yates in the beginning, her immediate family had a history of mental illnesses. Her brother was diagnosed with bipolar disorder and two other siblings suffered from depression. After her oldest child was born, Yates developed postpartum psychosis, which caused her to experience hallucinations of stabbings (McLellan, December 2, 2006).
Kemmerich’s mother is not convinced that Paul is telling the truth, saying, “I have felt how terribly he died. I have heard his voice at night, I have felt his anguish—tell the truth, I want to know it, I must know it” (180). Paul deliberately continues being vague in order to comfort his comrade’s mother. She is relentless in investigating her son’s death, pleading, “Are you willing never to come back yourself, if isn’t true?” and Paul quickly replies, “May I never come back if he wasn’t killed instantaneously” (181). This is
Identify & explain the elements of proof necessary for a plaintiff to prove a negligence case. “Four elements are essential to prove negligence: (1) a duty of care, (2) breach of that duty, (3) injury, and (4) causation” (Showalter, 2008, p. 47). The duty of care establishes the necessary link between the defendant and the plaintiff under the offense of negligence (Fitzgerald, 2011). The legal expectation of a duty of care is that the physician will provide care consistent with the level of training, skill, and competence of a physician in the same or similar circumstance. Thus an ophthalmologist is expected to act in accordance with the standards of practice and care of other similarly situated ophthalmologists.