![]() Hooper was sued for the value of two barges. In this case, the owner of the tugboat T.J. ![]() Hooper in 1932 helped to alter how the legal profession thought about custom and the standard of care. The first case had nothing to do with medicine, but rather a tugboat. Two cases changed the legal definition of the standard of care as it is applied in medical malpractice law today. A jury still needed to decide, however, whether this “custom” was reasonable and whether the deviation from this “custom” was so unreasonable as to cause harm. Ruppert, when “certain dangers have been removed by a customary way of doing things safely, this custom may be proved to show that has fallen below the required standard.” 5 Put another way, if others in the business are commonly practicing a certain way that eliminates hazards, then this practice can be used to define the standard of care. The second element, breach of duty, is synonymous with the “standard of care.” Prior to several important cases in the 1900s, the standard of care was defined by the legal concept of “custom.” As quoted in the 1934 case of Garthe v. These conditions are: duty breach of duty harm and causation. It requires four conditions (elements) be met for the plaintiff to recover damages. ![]() Negligence, in general, is legally defined as “the standard of conduct to which one must conform… is that of a reasonable man under like circumstances.” 4 In law, medical malpractice is considered a specific area within the general domain of negligence.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |