Most often in medical malpractice cases, the emphasis is on the plaintiff’s burden to prove a departure from the standard of care and that the departure was a proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injury. There is, however, another indispensable element in all medical malpractice actions that often gets less attention. That element is whether the physician had a duty to the plaintiff or, to phrase it differently, whether there was a physician-patient relationship sufficient to give rise to liability.1 A series of recent medical malpractice cases have looked at the issue of duty. This article will summarize those cases and suggest a unifying method to analyze the issue in future medical malpractice actions.
Independent Examination
In Bazakos v. Lewis,2 the plaintiff commenced an action against Dr. Phillip Lewis for injuries suffered during an independent medical examination (IME) related to an automobile litigation. The issue was whether the 2½- year medical malpractice statute of limitations or the three-year personal injury statute of limitations applied.
This content has been archived.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]
