Abstract
The family physician entering practice soon learns that every action during the working day has possible legal implications and, just as modern medical science makes vast strides daily, legal changes are occurring rapidly and the family physician must keep abreast of new developments in this pervasive aspect of his practice. This chapter discusses significant medicolegal problems of the family physician, illustrated by specific pivotal cases. The modern family physician treats a broad range of problems that cuts across the turf of other specialists and thus shares many of the legal snares that threaten other specialties. Many of the physicians involved in cases cited here are family physicians whereas others are specialists in allied fields. The specific legal cases discussed have been chosen for their relevance to the practice of family medicine today.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Albert Einstein Medical Center v Lipoff, Civil No. 3872X. C.P. Philadelphia, April 23, 1973
Alexander v Knight, 197 Pa Super 79, 177 A 2d:142, 1962 (dictum) ; accord Hammonds v Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. 243 F. Supp. 793, N.D. Ohio, 1065
Chambers v Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp. In ATL Newsletter, June 1973, p 221
Chasco v Providence Memorial Hospital, 476 SW 2d 385, Texas, 1972
Cullum v Seifer, 81 CAL Rptr 381, CAL, 1969
Darling v Charleston Community Memorial Hospital, 50 Ill, App. 2d 253, 200 N.E. 2d 149, 1964. aff’d, 33 Ill. 2d 326, 211 N.E. 2d 253, 1965. cert. denies, 383 U.S. 946, 1966
Dietz: The Medical Malpractice Legal System in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Appendix, Report of the Secretary’s Commission on Medical Malpractice 87, 1973
Faithe RF: Medical malpractice and your female patient. Fem Patient, 2:54, 1977
Fisher v Wilkinson, 382 SW 2d 627
Hill v Stewart, Miss. 209 So. 2d 809
Hofstra Law Review, 39 App. Div. 2d 1 330 NYS 2d 743 4 Dept. 1972
Hummel v State, 210 Ark 471, 196 SW 2d 594; Adams v Ison Ky 249 SW 2d 791; Tvedt v Haugen, 70 ND 338, 294 NW 183, 132 ALR 379; Halverson v Zimmerman 60 ND 113, 232 NW 754
Kaiser v Suburban Transportation System and Group Health Co-operative of Puget Sound, 308 Pacific 2d 14
Larson v Lindahl, 450 P 2d 77 Colorado, 1968
Medical Practice Computer Profile: Proof of the doctor’s actions in a series of similar cases. VCDL 7:523, 1974
Miller AJ: The Contractual Liability of Physicians and Surgeons. Wash. ULQ 16:413, 1953
Mulligan v Wetchler, 332 NYS 2d 68, NY, 1972
Murphy v Godwin, Del. Super. 303 A 2d 668
Naccarato v Grob, 180 NW 2d 788, Mich., 1970
N.Y. Civil Practice Law & Rules. McKinney 6:214, 1972
Norton v Argonaut Insurance Company, 144 So. 2d 249, La. App., 1962
Pollock: The Law of Torts. London, 12th ed., 1923, p 440
Prosser WL: Handbook of the Law of Torts, 4th ed. St Paul, Minnesota, Western Pub., 1971, p 339
Ribando v American Cyanamid Company, 37 Miss. 2d 603; 235 NYS 2d 110; 20 App. Div. 2d 696; 247 NYS 2d 379, 1961
Rockhill v Pollard, 259 Or. 54, 1971; 485 Pac. 2d 28
Smith v Shankman, 25 Cal. Rptr. 195, Cal. 1962
Tessitore v McGilva, Silverman, et al in Pacific Reporter, 2nd series, p 716
Travelers Insurance Company v Bergeron, CA8 25 F 2d 680
Vigil v Herman, 424 P 2d 159, Ariz., 1967
Waltuck v Poushter, 344 NYS 2d 369
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1978 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Friedman, G.A. (1978). Legal Aspects of Family Practice. In: Taylor, R.B. (eds) Family Medicine. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3999-2_86
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3999-2_86
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4757-4001-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4757-3999-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive