LEGAL MEDICINE

Legal Medicine study of application of medicine in legal cases (eg. Autopsy)

Forensic science application of science in legal cases (eg. DNA testing)
Medical Jurisprudence branch of law; relationship of medical profession vis--vis
government (ie. Licensing, Medical regulation and medical organizations)

Medical Malpractice
- Applies to doctors, nurses, midwives, pharmacists, dentists
- Not covered by criminal law
- Not covered by civil law (breach of contract, breach of duty/torts)
- It is a class of its own

Doctrines:
Respondeat Superior
let the master answer for the servant Medical malpractice A legal doctrine that ho
lds an employer liable for anemployee's wrongful or negligent act.

Doctrine of assumption of risk
A legal doctrine that states that a person who knowingly exposes him/herself to
hazards with potential for bodily harmcannot hold others liable if harm occurs; u
nder the AORD, a person who consents to a medical procedure
oralternatively, decides to forego a physician-recommended therapy
with knowledge that injury is a foreseeablealbeituncommon
result, waives the right to a future complaint that any foreseeable injury was ca
used by negligence,assuming medical treatment was performed with proper car
e, and res ipsa loquitur cannot be evoked

Borrowed employee
A principle under which the party usually liable for a persons actions
e.g., a hospital which has employed a particularnurse
is absolved of responsibility when that 'borrowed servant' is asked to do someth
inge.g., by a surgeonwhichis outside of the bounds of hospital policy

Doctrine of last clear chance
The last clear chance is a doctrine in the law of torts that is employed incontrib
utory
negligence jurisdictions. Under this doctrine, a negligent plaintiffcan nonetheless
recover if he is able to show that the defendant had the lastopportunity to avoid
the accident. Though the stated rationale has differeddepending on the court ado
pting the doctrine, the underlying idea is tomitigate the harshness of the contrib
utory negligence rule. The defendantcan also use this doctrine as a defense. If the
plaintiff has the last clearchance to avoid the accident, the defendant will not be
liable.
The Restatement (Second) of Torts explains the doctrine in detail as follows:
479. LAST CLEAR CHANCE: HELPLESS PLAINTIFF
A plaintiff who has negligently subjected himself to a risk of harm from thedefen
dant's subsequent negligence may recover for harm caused thereby if,immediate
ly preceding the harm,
(a) the plaintiff is unable to avoid it by the exercise of reasonable vigilanceand ca
re, and
(b) the defendant is negligent in failing to utilize with reasonable care andcompe
tence his then existing opportunity to avoid the harm, when he
(i) knows of the plaintiff's situation and realizes or has reason to realize theperil
involved in it or
(ii) would discover the situation and thus have reason to realize the peril, ifhe w
ere to exercise the vigilance which it is then his duty to the plaintiff toexercise.
480. LAST CLEAR CHANCE: INATTENTIVE PLAINTIFF
A plaintiff who, by the exercise of reasonable vigilance, could discover thedanger
created by the defendant's negligence in time to avoid the harm tohim, can reco
ver if, but only if, the defendant
(a) knows of the plaintiff's situation, and
(b) realizes or has reason to realize that the plaintiff is inattentive andtherefore
unlikely to discover his peril in time to avoid the harm, and
(c) thereafter is negligent in failing to utilize with reasonable care andcompetenc
e his then existing opportunity to avoid the harm.
The introduction of the doctrine is widely attributed to the English case ofDavies
v. Mann, 152 Eng. Rep. 588 (1842)
Emergency or Sudden Peril Doctrine
(in law) a doctrine that assumes a person's consent to medical treatment when h
e or she is in imminent danger andunable to give informed consent to treatment.
Emergency doctrine assumes that the person would consent if able to doso. Com
monly known as implied consent.

Res Adjudicata/ Res Judicata
adj decided or determined by judicial power; a thing judicially decided.

Res Ipsa Loquitur
Latin for the thing speaks for itself. A legal doctrine under which a plaintiffs bur
den to prove a defendants negligenceis minimal and may not require expert wit
nesses as the details of the incident are clear and understandable to a jury
e.g., foreign objects, gauze, surgical instruments, left in the patient during surger
y

Captain of the Ship Rule
Medical malpractice An adaptation from the 'borrowed servant rules', as applied
to an operating room, which arose inMcConnell v Williams, holding the person in
charge
eg, a surgeon responsible for all under his supervision, regardless ofwhether the
'captain' is directly responsible for an alleged error or act of alleged negligence, a
nd despite the assistants'positions as hospital employees.

Doctrine of Proximate Cause
Doctrine of Contributory Negligence
A patient or plaintiffs conduct while under a physicians care that falls below tha
t which a reasonable person wouldexercise for his or her own protection, thereb
y contributing to the physicians alleged negligence


Art. 2176 any extracontractual obligations = quasi delicts; no intention to cause
harm; breach of duty

In quasi delicts = contractual obligations; in civil law countries; breach of duty;
unintentional
In torts = involves contractual and extracontractual obligations; usual in common law
countries; with or without intent

Doctrine of Proximate Cause an act/omission which, without a supervening cause,
will cause injury/damage to the person as a natural, logical consequence of the action;
as long as you can establish cause and effect; starts at the time of discovery; not related
to time and space; no prescription

Medical Negligence practices which fall below the minimum standard of practice
Elements:
There is a legal Duty to perform within a minimum standard of practice
Breach of this legal duty
Damage or legal injury happens
Proximate Cause of the damage is the breach

Medical Documentation
Most important Informed Consent
Signed waiver not valid if death occurs Future rights cannot be waived; death not
included in the consent; primary reason for procedure is treatment not injury.