Health Law

Legal Bytes: July 31, 2017

Legal Bytes: July 31, 2017

Legal Bytes — June 8, 2017

Legal Bytes -- June 8, 2017

Legal Bytes

Legal Bytes

Supreme Court Clarifies Methodology for Reimbursing Providers of Medical Devices to Auto Accident Victims

Automobile insurers liable for reimbursing providers of medical products to accident victims are not restricted to the methodologies identified in the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law (MVFRL) and Department of Insurance regulations, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held in Freedom Med. Supply, Inc. v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co.

By | 2017-05-19T22:51:22+00:00 February 25th, 2016|Categories: General, Health Law, Insurance|Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |Comments Off on Supreme Court Clarifies Methodology for Reimbursing Providers of Medical Devices to Auto Accident Victims

Research Compliance: Staying Out of the Spotlight

Over the last ten years, research compliance has become a major focus of government regulators and enforcers. There is considerable risk in the conduct of research, but the best defense any organization has against the government’s wrath, is a research compliance program.

By | 2015-08-12T10:04:06+00:00 August 12th, 2015|Categories: Health Law|Tags: , , , , , |Comments Off on Research Compliance: Staying Out of the Spotlight

Records Produced by Hospital for Government Investigation not Protected by Peer Review Privilege

Documents and communications generated by a hospital during a governmental agency’s investigation of a failed medical procedure are not protected from discovery by the Pennsylvania Peer Review Protection Act, 63 P.S. §425.1 et seq., the Superior Court held in Yocabet v. UPMC Presbyterian and University of Pittsburgh Physicians

By | 2017-05-19T22:51:28+00:00 June 24th, 2015|Categories: Civil Litigation, Health Law|Tags: , , , , , , |Comments Off on Records Produced by Hospital for Government Investigation not Protected by Peer Review Privilege

Evidence of Patient’s Consent to Treatment Inadmissible in Medical Negligence Action

Evidence that a patient affirmatively consented to treatment after being informed of the risks of that treatment is generally irrelevant to a cause of action sounding in medical negligence, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled in Brady v. Urbas.

By | 2017-05-19T22:51:29+00:00 April 22nd, 2015|Categories: Civil Litigation, Health Law|Tags: , , , , , |Comments Off on Evidence of Patient’s Consent to Treatment Inadmissible in Medical Negligence Action