Last year California Governor Jerry Brown signed into law California SB 1172, which makes it illegal to provide “conversion” or “reparative” therapy to homosexuals under the age of 18 in the state. The issue is whether this an unremarkable and rational exercise of the police power of the state or an infringement of First Amendment rights. Supporters of the bill assert that the “antigay” therapy is worthless pseudoscience and has the potential of harming young homosexuals who are struggling with identity and self worth issues. They claim that homosexuality is not a disease or an assumed condition, but an intrinsic or genetic positioning on a natural scale of human sexuality.
The United States Supreme Court, in a unanimous opinion written Justice Sotomayor, overturned an Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals and Georgia District Court finding “state action” antitrust immunity in the case of FTC v. Phoebe Putney Health System, Inc. et al, No. 11-1160. Had they ruled otherwise there would have opened a huge whole in the FTC’s ability to regulate anticompetitive conduct by state sub-entities under a general grant of state authority. Georgia like many states has a hospital authorities law that permits counties and or municipalities to create quasi governmental entities with broad grants of powers to operate health care facilities.
On November 30, 2012, Judge Greg Costa of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, on remand from the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, allowed three Indian cardiologists to move forward with their discrimination claim against David P. Brown, the administrator of Citizen’s Medical Center, finding that under the McDonnell Douglas shifting burden framework, the plaintiff’s had met their burden of showing a prima facie case of discrimination through circumstantial evidence on 4 out of 8 adverse employment actions alleged by the plaintiffs and that the justifications offered by the defendant were pre-textual.
“Yo-yo litigation” bouncing back and forth between trial courts and appellate courts is wearing and expensive. Dr. Richard Chudacoff, M.D. should be able to attest to that. Prior to moving to Las Vegas, Nevada in 2008, he was a renowned minimally invasive gynecological surgeon at Baylor University in Texas. In May of 2008, the University Medical Center of Southern Nevada, where he was an assistant professor, abruptly suspended his clinical privileges without notice or hearing. The action was described as a “routine administrative action” and not a 30 day emergency action based on immanent harm to patients. His university employment terminated because of the loss of his privileges. The university hospital forwarded a report of the suspension to the National Practitioner Data Bank in Washington asserting that the suspension resulted from “substandard or inadequate care.” Subsequently the “fair hearing” panel hearing his case disagreed with the grounds for the suspension and sent a recommendation to the Medical Executive Committee that his suspension be lifted and it was, in October, 2008.
An Albuquerque Obstetrician/Gynecologist, filed a pro-se lawsuit in Federal District Court in New Mexico claiming that a hospital which permanently suspended his privileges deprived him of his civil rights overcame the hospital’s defense of immunity under the Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986 (“HCQIA”). In Chinonyerem Osuagwu v. Gila Regional Medical Center, (No. 1:11 -cv-1 3/27/12), Dr. Osuagwu presented evidence that Gila Regional failed to follow its own bylaws and failed to provide him due process in permanently suspending his privileges without meeting the requirements of HCQIA for immunity. One of the defendants, Dr. Romillard, a non -practicing gynecologist advised the hospital’s peer review committee as to why Dr. O’s privileges should be suspended.
Michael Mitchell was a anesthesia technician at the University of Kentucky Chandler Medical Center when he was discovered to have possession of a loaded semi-automatic pistol in his automobile. The gun was licensed and he had a concealed weapons permit. In April of 2009, the University fired him for violation of its no guns on campus policy. Mitchell, an at-will employee, brought an action for “wrongful termination” for violation of his constitutional rights to bear arms and his rights under Kentucky statutes. Kentucky, like most states recognizes an exception to an “at will” firing where the firing has been the result of a violation of the clearly expressed public policy of a state. Mr. Mitchell’s suit was dismissed on summary judgment and he appealed to the Kentucky Supreme Court which reversed.
Wendell Potter is a former health care PR Director for Cigna who quit in disgust following CIGNA’s refusal to timely agree to provide a liver transplant for a 17 year old girl in 2007, Nataline Sarkisyan, who died without the procedure. He now works for the Center for Public Integrity as an analyst. Yesterday, in his blog, he called out the objection by one of the shareholders of CIGNA to the company’s increasing his compensation by 25% to an annual total compensation of about $20,000. The 46 year old, David Cordani, who looks a lot like the Russian New Jersey Nets owner Mikhail Prokhorov, is frequently sought out on the speaking circuit including Davos, Switzerland where he rails against rising health care costs as being unsustainable. On his departure earlier in the year the Hartford Courant quoted him as saying “ when you take the cost of sickness, its at an elevated level and its growing.”
Jennie Linn McCormack of Pocatello, Idaho has a messy life. She is the single mother of three children living on a $250.00 per month child support payment for one of her children. She is unemployed, poverty stricken and desperate. Adding to her troubles she became pregnant again and the father is now serving time in prison for robbery.
[This is a guest post by Joanne Berry of Pannone LLP's Serious Injury Team in the UK.]
The following article provides an overview of the US and UK legal systems regarding head and brain injuries compensation, when said injuries are sustained through accidents. To make the comparison easier, the focus of this comparison will be on head injuries or brain injuries that were caused due to a road traffic accident. The aim is to provide an interesting comparison to encourage debate and discussion of the pros and cons of both systems.
The Texas Sonogram abortion case returned to Judge Sam Sparks in the U.S. District Court last week after his finding that the Texas law requiring physicians performing abortions to show pre-abortion patients copies of sonogram images and to listen to fetal heartbeats 24 hours before performing the procedure was unconstitutional. The Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals overturned Judge Sparks in January. The case, Texas Physicians Providing Abortion Services v. David Lackey, M.D., built upon the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Planned Parenthood of Southeast Pennsylvania v. Casey,which upheld the right to abortion, but affirmed the state’s “informed consent” requirement that certain information be provided to the woman first.
