1975•JAMARequires access

Malpractice Insurance-Reply

Wilcox Dp

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

In Reply.— In making his decision as to which person(s) and/or institutions(s) should be properly named as defendants in a professional liability suit, the one essential element that the plaintiff's attorney must properly evaluate is whether or not, for each possible defendant, negligence can be proved. The fact that a possible defendant has substantial assets, ie, insurance, will usually be persuasive in the decision regarding which possible defendants should be named in a suit when it is expected that the negligence of this defendant in this instance can be successfully demonstrated in court. Of course, if the court subsequently finds that this defendant was not negligent, his assets are not available to compensate the plaintiff for any damages he may allege.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In Reply.— In making his decision as to which person(s) and/or institutions(s) should be properly named as defendants in a professional liability suit, the one essential element that the plaintiff's attorney must properly evaluate is whether or not, for each possible defendant, negligence can be proved. The fact that a possible defendant has substantial assets, ie, insurance, will usually be persuasive in the decision regarding which possible defendants should be named in a suit when it is expected that the negligence of this defendant in this instance can be successfully demonstrated in court. Of course, if the court subsequently finds that this defendant was not negligent, his assets are not available to compensate the plaintiff for any damages he may allege.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In Reply.— In making his decision as to which person(s) and/or institutions(s) should be properly named as defendants in a professional liability suit, the one essential element that the plaintiff's attorney must properly evaluate is whether or not, for each possible defendant, negligence can be proved. The fact that a possible defendant has substantial assets, ie, insurance, will usually be persuasive in the decision regarding which possible defendants should be named in a suit when it is expected that the negligence of this defendant in this instance can be successfully demonstrated in court. Of course, if the court subsequently finds that this defendant was not negligent, his assets are not available to compensate the plaintiff for any damages he may allege.

Key concepts: Plaintiff, Damages, Medicine, Malpractice, Liability, Law, Element (criminal law), Actuarial science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Malpractice Insurance-Reply — Research Paper | ScholarLens