Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
883 results for '* industry:"Health Care"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2022-07-11
Practice Area: Civil Procedure
Industry: Health Care
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Adams County
Judge: Judge George
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0696
The court granted defendant's preliminary objection to plaintiffs' complaint on the basis that plaintiffs failed to effectuate proper service requirements pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 402. Specifically, the court noted plaintiffs did not demonstrate a good faith effort to serve defendant pursuant to the requirements laid out in recent precedent and therefore further failed to satisfy their evidentiary burden. The court noted it did not matter whether the reasons for failing to make a good faith effort were intentio
Publication Date: 2022-07-04
Practice Area: Products Liability
Industry: Health Care | Manufacturing
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Middle
Judge: District Judge Conner
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0737
Plaintiff moved to remand and defendant moved to dismiss part of the complaint and argued for fraudulent joinder in plaintiff's action over medical equipment and court found defendants' arguments did not conclusively foreclose plaintiff's negligent supplier theory under Ohio product liability statutes and remanded. Motion granted.
Publication Date: 2022-06-27
Practice Area: Employment Litigation
Industry: Health Care
Court: Commonwealth Court
Judge: Judge Cannon
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0712
Workers' compensation appeal board properly granted employer's modification petition because claimant did not establish a vested right in her post-Protz-per-Act 111 temporary total disability status, did not meet the requirement for relief under either due process or due course of law principles and in reenacting the impairment rating evaluation process, act 111 did not violate the "reasonable compensation" aspect of Art. III, §18. Affirmed.
Publication Date: 2022-06-27
Practice Area: Securities Litigation
Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory | State and Local Government
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Bartle
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0716
Defendants moved to dismiss plaintiffs' Securities Act and Securities Exchange Act action asserting material misstatements and omissions of fact regarding fact that CEO was under criminal and civil investigation in Denmark for tax fraud and in changing the way growth revenue was reported without making that change clear to investors and court found plaintiffs sufficiently pled facts to put the issues before a jury. Motion denied.
Publication Date: 2022-06-27
Practice Area: Medical Malpractice
Industry: Federal Government | Health Care
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Pratter
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0707
Medical expert witness holding administrative, non-clinical medical license could not opine on the duty of care owed by a physician but was competent to testify as to the duty of care owed by hospital management as administrators. Defendant's partial motion to dismiss granted, motion to exclude expert testimony granted in part and denied in part.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: By Alex Geisler
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2022-06-20
Practice Area: Health Care Law
Industry: Federal Government
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Schiller
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0690
Defendants moved to dismiss, to sever and to suppress evidence in action charging them with conspiracy to pay and receive health care kickbacks and court found severance was not warranted, there was no misjoinder, a Franks hearing was not required and defendant Miller's role as a non-health care provider had no bearing on her ability to be charged under the anti-kickback statute. Motions denied.
Publication Date: 2022-06-20
Practice Area: Criminal Law
Industry: Consulting | Health Care
Court: Superior Court
Judge: Judge Olson
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0678
Subrogation recovery company was not entitled to receive restitution for the costs of health care incurred to treat an assault victim's injuries, where the restitution statute only authorized receipt of restitution funds by a victim or an insurance company. Judgment of sentence vacated, case remanded.
Publication Date: 2022-06-20
Practice Area: Health Care Law
Industry: State and Local Government
Court: Commonwealth Court
Judge: Judge Covey
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0680
Denial of inmate's request for their mental health treatment records did not violate inmate's rights where DOC had legitimate penological interest in maintaining relationships of inmates and treatment staff to obtain accurate and candid impressions and evaluations from staff. Application for summary relief denied.
Publication Date: 2022-06-20
Practice Area: Wrongful Death
Industry: Health Care
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Marston
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0688
Defendants moved to strike plaintiff's amended complaint and plaintiff moved to remand her action over her mother's death while a resident in defendant facility and court found plaintiff impermissibly added individual defendants to defeat diversity, dismissed the action against those individuals and declined to remand. Motion granted in part, motion denied.
Publication Date: 2022-06-20
Practice Area: Labor Law
Industry: Health Care
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
Judge: Judge Allen
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 22-0582
The court refused to dismiss plaintiff's workplace harassment claims based on her failure to exhaust administrative remedies under the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act where she sought protections from workplace harassment afforded to all employees and did not allege that the inappropriate conduct was due, in any part, to her gender. The court recommended affirmance.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read