tag:typepad.com,2003:weblog-1250480 2008-07-10T09:25:32-07:00 News and information about the legal system and its impact on the professional. TypePad tag:mpamedia.com,2008:post-53752 2010-03-12T12:00:32-07:00 2010-03-12T12:00:07-07:00

I have spent a considerable amount of time in courtrooms lately at trials of chiropractors accused of negligence. An unusual confluence of events occurred this year whereby three trials began in various parts of the country almost simultaneously. The circumstances in these cases are all quite different and unique, but there is a common thread that links them. In all of the cases, the outcome from treatment was unexpected and unintended for both the doctor and the patient.

By Greg N. Dunn, DC I have spent a considerable amount of time in courtrooms lately at trials of chiropractors accused of negligence. An unusual confluence of events occurred this year whereby three trials began in various parts of the country almost simultaneously. The circumstances in these cases are all quite different and unique, but there is a common thread that links them. In all of the cases, the outcome from treatment was unexpected and unintended for both the doctor and the patient. tag:mpamedia.com,2008:post-54494 2010-03-12T12:00:32-07:00 2010-03-12T12:00:07-07:00

Justice R. Paul Belzil of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench has denied certification of a $529 million class-action suit filed in 2008 against Alberta chiropractor Dr. Gregory Stiles and the Alberta College and Association of Chiropractors (ACAC). Filed by Sandra and David Nette, the suit alleged that a 2007 adjustment by Stiles left her paralyzed. According to a Jan. 15 article in the Edmonton Sun reporting on Justice Belzil's ruling,1 the suit specifically alleged that Dr. Stiles' "prescribed upper-neck adjustments ruptured Sandra's right and left vertebral arteries, which disrupted blood flow to her brain and caused a cascade of strokes, resulting in permanent neurological damage."

By Editorial Staff Justice R. Paul Belzil of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench has denied certification of a $529 million class-action suit filed in 2008 against Alberta chiropractor Dr. Gregory Stiles and the Alberta College and Association of Chiropractors (ACAC). Filed by Sandra and David Nette, the suit alleged that a 2007 adjustment by Stiles left her paralyzed. According to a Jan. 15 article in the Edmonton Sun reporting on Justice Belzil's ruling,1 the suit specifically alleged that Dr. Stiles' "prescribed upper-neck adjustments ruptured Sandra's right and left vertebral arteries, which disrupted blood flow to her brain and caused a cascade of strokes, resulting in permanent neurological damage." tag:mpamedia.com,2008:post-54538 2010-03-12T12:00:32-07:00 2010-03-12T12:00:07-07:00

One of the most frustrating aspects of patient care is watching your patient's legal claim go down in flames. Often they become saddled with your medical bill and others they expected the responsible insurer would pay. Adding insult to injury, many states have a statutory offer system in place whereby one party must pay the other party's legal fees if they fail to recover more than what was offered to them prior to an arbitration or trial. This is just one of the factors driving plaintiffs to accept low settlement offers. The fallout often affects the treating doctors, who are then asked to take a cut in their fees.

By Arthur Croft, DC, MS, MPH, FACO One of the most frustrating aspects of patient care is watching your patient's legal claim go down in flames. Often they become saddled with your medical bill and others they expected the responsible insurer would pay. Adding insult to injury, many states have a statutory offer system in place whereby one party must pay the other party's legal fees if they fail to recover more than what was offered to them prior to an arbitration or trial. This is just one of the factors driving plaintiffs to accept low settlement offers. The fallout often affects the treating doctors, who are then asked to take a cut in their fees. tag:mpamedia.com,2008:post-54419 2010-01-15T12:00:32-07:00 2010-01-15T12:00:07-07:00

The seemingly complex, or perhaps even inscrutable, calculus of what practitioners term personal injury is, in truth, deceptively simple. However, while it keeps getting simpler, many practitioners and lawyers feel hopelessly wrapped around the axle of this puzzling system. The net result is abandonment of needful patients and clients, with a corresponding loss of revenue stream. Consider just a few facts. Motor vehicle collisions are a leading cause of injury in the U.S. and constitute one of our most burdensome public health dilemmas. With 3 million such injuries each year, a total recovery proportion of only about 50 percent, a permanent disability proportion of 10-12 percent, coupled with the fact that many of the injured are young and have many quality life years to lose, the $43 billion annual price tag is hardly surprising.

By Arthur Croft, DC, MS, MPH, FACO The seemingly complex, or perhaps even inscrutable, calculus of what practitioners term personal injury is, in truth, deceptively simple. However, while it keeps getting simpler, many practitioners and lawyers feel hopelessly wrapped around the axle of this puzzling system. The net result is abandonment of needful patients and clients, with a corresponding loss of revenue stream. Consider just a few facts. Motor vehicle collisions are a leading cause of injury in the U.S. and constitute one of our most burdensome public health dilemmas. With 3 million such injuries each year, a total recovery proportion of only about 50 percent, a permanent disability proportion of 10-12 percent, coupled with the fact that many of the injured are young and have many quality life years to lose, the $43 billion annual price tag is hardly surprising. tag:mpamedia.com,2008:post-54421 2010-01-15T12:00:32-07:00 2010-01-15T12:00:07-07:00

Seventeen lawyers representing state chiropractic associations and the American Chiropractic Association attended the November 2009 meeting of the National Association of Chiropractic Attorneys. Among the topics of discussion were Office of Inspector General opinions on discounts, Internet advertising and physical therapy services provided incident to physician treatments; legal issues relating to association relationships with PPOs; restriction of association memberships; legal issues attendant to chiropractic employment of physical therapists and Medicare billing, unionization of physicians; preemption of state insurance laws by ERISA; the validity of Medicare local carriers policies; compliance with the Red Flags rule; Medicare regulations affecting fee discounts, potential class-action suits against health insurers improperly demanding refunds of approved claims; and endorsement by associations of products and services.

By Editorial Staff Seventeen lawyers representing state chiropractic associations and the American Chiropractic Association attended the November 2009 meeting of the National Association of Chiropractic Attorneys. Among the topics of discussion were Office of Inspector General opinions on discounts, Internet advertising and physical therapy services provided incident to physician treatments; legal issues relating to association relationships with PPOs; restriction of association memberships; legal issues attendant to chiropractic employment of physical therapists and Medicare billing, unionization of physicians; preemption of state insurance laws by ERISA; the validity of Medicare local carriers policies; compliance with the Red Flags rule; Medicare regulations affecting fee discounts, potential class-action suits against health insurers improperly demanding refunds of approved claims; and endorsement by associations of products and services. tag:mpamedia.com,2008:post-54400 2010-01-01T12:00:32-07:00 2010-01-01T12:00:07-07:00

At first blush, the word self-defense brings to mind an individual who reacts to being beset upon by another person. With just cause, the individual doing the defending can exercise reasonable and justifiable means to protect themselves and to ensure that an assault is avoided or stopped. But there is also a different kind of self-defense, the kind that doesn't involve an individual faced with an attempted or actual physical assault. I'm talking about a professional, for the purposes of this discussion a health care professional, who is faced with an allegation of misconduct or professional negligence.

By Allan Freedman, LLB At first blush, the word self-defense brings to mind an individual who reacts to being beset upon by another person. With just cause, the individual doing the defending can exercise reasonable and justifiable means to protect themselves and to ensure that an assault is avoided or stopped. But there is also a different kind of self-defense, the kind that doesn't involve an individual faced with an attempted or actual physical assault. I'm talking about a professional, for the purposes of this discussion a health care professional, who is faced with an allegation of misconduct or professional negligence.