In a medical malpractice case before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, appellate counsel argued over the circumstances necessary for a reasonable patient to think the treating doctor is an agent of a hospital under the Medical Care Availability and Reduction of Error Act, as well as that law’s limits on nonphysician testimony.
During oral arguments in Philadelphia on March 10 in Green v. Pennsylvania Hospital, the plaintiff’s attorney listed five pieces of evidence which he said should show that the hospital is vicariously liable for the actions of the doctor in question. Defense counsel said the case presented to the justices was “not the case that was tried before the jury.”
This content has been archived.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]
