If the goal of the 2005 tort “reform” law was to discourage lawyers from helping victims of substandard emergency room care, it has been successful. While I haven’t seen definitive data, most plaintiffs lawyers I know are reluctant to take ER cases.
The 2005 law protects ERs by requiring many potential plaintiffs to show “clear and convincing” evidence of “gross negligence,” which the courts have defined as “failure to exercise even a slight degree of care” and “lack of the diligence that even careless men are accustomed to exercise.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
