I. Introduction The validity of a claim for loss of parental consortium in a case where the parent has been seriously injured, but not killed, is a matter of first impression in this State. When our Supreme Court is squarely presented with this issue for the first time, New Hampshire should join the seventeen other states which have recognized this cause of action since 1980. The cause of action is a natural progression of New Hampshire common law, and it is supported by the public policy revealed in this state’s legislative enactments and constitutional provisions.Read more
http://www.arbd.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ABD-logo.jpg00Mark Abramsonhttp://www.arbd.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ABD-logo.jpgMark Abramson1999-10-28 02:22:252017-04-28 02:23:12Parental Consortium in Non-Death Cases
Liens complicate the resolution of nearly every personal injury case. Early identification of lien holders and knowledge of the circumstances under which liens may be compromised are essential to the favorable resolution of the client’s claims.Read more
http://www.arbd.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ABD-logo.jpg00Mark Abramsonhttp://www.arbd.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ABD-logo.jpgMark Abramson1999-07-24 21:11:592017-04-24 21:13:08Minimizing Liens and Maximizing Personal Injury Recoveries
This is the third in a series of articles addressing the controversial issue of HMO liability.1The primary focus of this article is the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s ground breaking decision inPappas v. Asbel2, in which the court ruled that negligence claims against health maintenance organizations are not preempted by ERISA.3Read more
http://www.arbd.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ABD-logo.jpg00Mark Abramsonhttp://www.arbd.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ABD-logo.jpgMark Abramson1999-04-24 22:07:042017-04-24 22:09:42HMO Liability Part III Return of the Plaintiffs
Mary is a 42-year old mother of three. In 1994 she presented to her primary care physician after having detected a lump on self-exam of her left breast. Mary’s primary care physician suspected fibrocystic disease, but as a precautionary measure, ordered a mammogram. The mammogram was interpreted as normal and no further follow-up was performed. One year later Mary returned to her primary care physician and reported that the lump had noticeably enlarged and she was experiencing tenderness in the area of the lump. At this time, Mary was referred to a surgeon who biopsied the lump and a diagnosis of cancer was made. Review of the earlier mammogram revealed that it had been misinterpreted and the diagnosis of Mary’s cancer was delayed for over one year. When removed, the malignant tumor measured 1.9 cm. and one lymph node was involved. Following radiation and chemotherapy, Mary has remained cancer free for two years. Mary has been advised by her doctors that there is a 30% chance that her cancer will recur, whereas if promptly diagnosed one year earlier, prior to lymph node involvement, the chances of recurrence were minimal. She comes to you for help.Read more
http://www.arbd.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ABD-logo.jpg00Mark Abramsonhttp://www.arbd.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ABD-logo.jpgMark Abramson1998-10-28 02:13:122017-04-28 02:14:04Fear of Future Harm in Medical Malpractice Cases
All it takes for a plaintiff to win a medical malpractice case before a jury is “a single dissenting voice among [all] surgeons on the stand” because “the sympathies of the jury” always run in favor of the plaintiff. The “sympathy of a jury of citizens is not generally with the doctor, but rather on the side of the poor, ill advised, unfortunate victim of incurable injury.” Litigation is forcing doctors to abandon their calling.Read more
http://www.arbd.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ABD-logo.jpg00Mark Abramsonhttp://www.arbd.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ABD-logo.jpgMark Abramson1998-07-15 02:19:482023-12-04 18:18:17Medical Malpractice & The American Jury Confronting The Myths About Jury Incompetence Deep Pockets
InCorso v. Merrill1, the New Hampshire Supreme Court adopted the tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress for those outside the zone of danger. Rejecting earlier precedent, and the weight of authority elsewhere, the Court found that “freedom from mental distress is an interest that is today worthy of legal protection.”2The language the Court used, however, has had the unintended affect of excluding medical malpractice victims from the right to recover. The Court has subsequently recognized that the New Hampshire Constitution does not permit medical malpractice plaintiffs to be treated differently than other personal injury plaintiffs.3Read more
http://www.arbd.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ABD-logo.jpg00Mark Abramsonhttp://www.arbd.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/ABD-logo.jpgMark Abramson1998-04-15 18:58:392017-04-15 22:40:28Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress in Medical Negligence Cases
Parental Consortium in Non-Death Cases
/ by Mark AbramsonI. Introduction
The validity of a claim for loss of parental consortium in a case where the parent has been seriously injured, but not killed, is a matter of first impression in this State. When our Supreme Court is squarely presented with this issue for the first time, New Hampshire should join the seventeen other states which have recognized this cause of action since 1980. The cause of action is a natural progression of New Hampshire common law, and it is supported by the public policy revealed in this state’s legislative enactments and constitutional provisions. Read more
Minimizing Liens and Maximizing Personal Injury Recoveries
/ by Mark AbramsonI. Introduction:
Liens complicate the resolution of nearly every personal injury case. Early identification of lien holders and knowledge of the circumstances under which liens may be compromised are essential to the favorable resolution of the client’s claims. Read more
HMO Liability Part III Return of the Plaintiffs
/ by Mark AbramsonI. Introduction:
This is the third in a series of articles addressing the controversial issue of HMO liability. 1 The primary focus of this article is the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s ground breaking decision in Pappas v. Asbel 2 , in which the court ruled that negligence claims against health maintenance organizations are not preempted by ERISA. 3 Read more
Fear of Future Harm in Medical Malpractice Cases
/ by Mark AbramsonMary is a 42-year old mother of three. In 1994 she presented to her primary care physician after having detected a lump on self-exam of her left breast. Mary’s primary care physician suspected fibrocystic disease, but as a precautionary measure, ordered a mammogram. The mammogram was interpreted as normal and no further follow-up was performed. One year later Mary returned to her primary care physician and reported that the lump had noticeably enlarged and she was experiencing tenderness in the area of the lump. At this time, Mary was referred to a surgeon who biopsied the lump and a diagnosis of cancer was made. Review of the earlier mammogram revealed that it had been misinterpreted and the diagnosis of Mary’s cancer was delayed for over one year. When removed, the malignant tumor measured 1.9 cm. and one lymph node was involved. Following radiation and chemotherapy, Mary has remained cancer free for two years. Mary has been advised by her doctors that there is a 30% chance that her cancer will recur, whereas if promptly diagnosed one year earlier, prior to lymph node involvement, the chances of recurrence were minimal. She comes to you for help. Read more
Medical Malpractice & The American Jury Confronting The Myths About Jury Incompetence Deep Pockets
/ by Mark AbramsonAll it takes for a plaintiff to win a medical malpractice case before a jury is “a single dissenting voice among [all] surgeons on the stand” because “the sympathies of the jury” always run in favor of the plaintiff. The “sympathy of a jury of citizens is not generally with the doctor, but rather on the side of the poor, ill advised, unfortunate victim of incurable injury.” Litigation is forcing doctors to abandon their calling. Read more
Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress in Medical Negligence Cases
/ by Mark AbramsonI. Introduction:
In Corso v. Merrill 1 , the New Hampshire Supreme Court adopted the tort of negligent infliction of emotional distress for those outside the zone of danger. Rejecting earlier precedent, and the weight of authority elsewhere, the Court found that “freedom from mental distress is an interest that is today worthy of legal protection.” 2 The language the Court used, however, has had the unintended affect of excluding medical malpractice victims from the right to recover. The Court has subsequently recognized that the New Hampshire Constitution does not permit medical malpractice plaintiffs to be treated differently than other personal injury plaintiffs. 3 Read more