There are several factors that must be addressed to determine agency relationship, vicarious liability and employee relationship. In the case, of Dr. Stevens and Dr. Mercer, an agency relationship begins when Dr. Stevens leased office space to Dr. Mercer given him expressed authority to purchase supplies on her behalf. A principal-agent relationship is formed when a person or firm is represented by another in business affairs with third parties (Liuzzo, 2013). The classes of agents are General agent, and Special Agent. A general agent is authorized and have complete authority to act on behalf of the principal agent in all business matters. A special agent has specific limits on the scope of his or her authority. They are delegated to act only in a specific transaction (Liuzzo, 2013). For example, I am an independent insurance agent authorized to market and enroll consumers in United Health Care health …show more content…
Stevens gives the agent (Dr. Mercer) express authority to purchase supplies for the principal. Dr. Mercer was given implied authority. Express authority can be oral or in writing given by the principal agent. Implied authority is the authority that an agent assumes that he or she has related to the express authority given by the principal agent (Liuzzo, 2013). I think that Dr. Stevens should be liable for the supplies because she entrusted him to make purchases for her. She also, failed to monitor and approve all orders.
Although Dr. Stevens and Dr. Mercer operated in the same building, and the sign displayed both of their names on the sign, Dr. Stevens is not liable for the patient injury’s. There was no partnership agreement, and they operated separate practices with their own lists of patients. This patient has assumed liability on both parties, but Dr. Mercers is the only person responsible for damages caused. Since Dr. Mercer terminated the lease without proper notice, he could be liable for the remainder of the
No further information was given and the questionnaire was not filled out. LAA’s doctors (Defendant), Dr. Preau and Dr. Dennis, submitted referral letters for on his behalf. The letter from Dr. Dennis and Dr. Preau stated that both of them had worked with Dr. Berry and they highly recommend Dr. Berry as an anaestheologist. Based on the letter and recommendations, Kadlec hired him. Approximately a year later, Berry again started using Demerol. On work at Kadlec, he committed gross negligence resulting in severe brain damage to patient. Due to this incidence Kadlec learned that Dr. Berry had been fired from Lakeview. Kadlec first settled Dr. Berry’s malpractice case and then filed suit against Lakeview, its shareholders, and LMC for intentional negligence and strict responsibility misrepresentation based on LMC’s omission of material facts in the letter to Kadlec. The district court supported Plaintiff’s theory. LMC’s moved for summary
In the Longville case, Elizabeth Blackwell who has received her medical degree specialized in neurological medicine accepted a job offer with Neurological Associates. Blackwell was then introduced to Dr. Richard Cohn and Dr. Jean Valjean, the two partners who managed Neurological Associates. Cohn, who was the primary contact spoke with Blackwell and came to an agreement of benefits Blackwell would receive while she was employed with NA. However, once Blackwell was hired Cohn had asked Blackwell to sign a document that was part of her contract, in which he had failed to inform her of during the previous negotiation. Cohn had informed Blackwell that the document was a normal procedure and she
“Agency relationships are formed by the mutual consent of a principal and an agent.” (Cheeseman, p.487) Our book goes on to cite the Restatement (Second) of Agency,
Walker, Takem’s has the statutory law of contracts in his favor. In a contract, the seller and the purchaser have certain rights and obligations. Four basics must be met for a contract to be created (Chrisman, 2014). First, the offer has to be made. In the case at hand, the door-to-door salesperson made an offer of a computer to Ms. Walker. Second, the consideration has to be accepted. Ms. Walker accepted the offer to purchase a computer. The third step is capacity. The purchaser must be legally capable of entering into a contract; minors and the mentally incompetent are excluded in this case. Takem’s has given Ms. Walker the computer in exchange for her payments on her store account. Finally, the intention to enter into a contract has to be present. Ms. Walker signed a bill of sale, a security agreement, and a negotiable promissory note- which is an unconditional promise to pay a certain sum of money at a certain time in the future. Though Takem’s has the advantage to combat her claims, Tommy needs to ensure that his salespeople have not made any false statements or misrepresentations to Ms. Walker as this could have legal implications for the store and against the contract (Vaccaro, 1987). Ms. Walker is legally bound by the contract she agreed to in exchange for the computer; however if there has been any misrepresentations or false statements Ms. Walker may be able, with legal assistance, to call the contract into question
Peter Paralegal is employed by Honest Law Firm and has been instructed by his supervising attorney to prepare and conduct initial interviews with two potential clients to see if a conflict of interest is present. Big Box and Value Mart are competitors and are requesting representation by Honest Law Firm on matters that are unrelated to one another. Peter Paralegal was also asked to perform tasks related to the cases such as; prepare questions and conduct initial interviews, explain legal fees arrangements, establish the attorney-client relations, draft initial pleadings and responses, interview witnesses, draft and sign initial case evaluation letters.
I will provide confirmable evidence to support, as her Primary Care Physician, you were guilty of negligent malpractice and failed to provide the minimum standard of medical care needs. Your reprehensible behavior resulted in years of suffering and emotional distress significantly affecting our quality of life. Testimony will show how ill-equipped you were to deal with the devastating issues associated with Normal Pressure Hydrocephalus and a debilitating sciatica condition, in a geriatric environment. The suit will not be a “he said, she said”
Ohio Dep’t of Rehabilitation & Correction are the poor-quality patient care that Tomcik received and Tomcik’s health being at risk. Once engaged in a doctor-patient relationship, physicians are obligated to provide the best possible care for the patient by utilizing their skills and knowledge as expected from a competent physician under the same or similar conditions (“What Is a Doctor’s Duty of Care?” n.d.). However, in Tomcik’s situation, Dr. Evans did not deliver high-quality care, for he administered a perfunctory breast examination and thus did not follow standard protocols. There is evidence of indifference conveyed by Dr. Evans, and the lack of proper care towards Tomcik is an issue that can be scrutinized and judged appropriately. Additionally, Tomcik’s health was at risk due to the failure of a proper physical evaluation and the incredibly long delay in diagnosis and treatment. The negligence from Dr. Evans, along with the lack of medical attention sought out by Tomcik after she had first discovered the lump in her breast, may contribute to Tomcik’s life being in danger as well as the emotional anguish she may have felt during that time period. Overall, the incident of Tomcik’s expectations from the original physician and other employees at the institution not being met is an ethical issue that should be dealt with
Howard Cohen, a doctor with 30 years of experience, had two of his patients’ files mixed up and told a healthy lady that she had a serious illness. Dr. Cohen was a highly respected doctor, yet managed to scare one of his patients, who noticed that the birthdate on her file was wrong, and helped prevent a situation that could have worsened. Dr. Cohen gave his sincere apology for his mistake that the patient accepted. In a case like this, if the patient had not accepted his apology and she decided to take legal action, should he be held liable? No.
At this case, Larry is liable on the damages that happened in Roger’s house as the failure to repair the leakages in time, ended causing massive destructions on Roger’s clothing, furniture and some precious items. Therefore, in case Larry could intervene before the leakage became larger, the impact of the damages would have been mitigated. On Roger’s side, although not a lawful obligation, attempted to mitigate the damage by moving some of the damaged properties from the vulnerable leaking areas. At this point, Larry is fully liable to compensate Roger on damages as he violated the tenancy right to reside in a habitable home. The rented unit was not habitable for Roger as the house was uncomfortable due to constant leakages during the rainy
Although the movie Jerry Maguire was a cinematic representation of a sports agency and what they do, it included some good examples of the material we have covered in legal aspects. In chapter ten of Sport law: A managerial approach, it states an agency relationship has two components (Sharp et al, 2014). Manifestation by the principal and consent by the agent are the two components to the agency relationship. A client who wishes to be represented must communicate to the agent of their wishes and end the agreement with a written contract signed by both parties (Sharp et al, 2014).
Partners: relations with associates, combined plans, company preparation, connecting with different groups on plan issues;
For the purposes of this article, we’ll imagine two separate powers of attorney: one for financial and other matters, and one for health care decisions. With a power of attorney, your “agent” or “attorney in fact” can handle all kinds of matters, provided you have granted him or her the authority to do so in the power of attorney document. For example, your agent can manage your bank and investment accounts, transfer funds, and insurance
An agency relationship is formed between two parties when one party (the agent) agrees to represent another party (the principal). Normally, all employees who deal with third parties are considered agents. Principal-Agent relationships are defined as the understanding that the agent will act for and on behalf of the principal. (Cheeseman) The agent assumes an obligation of loyalty to the principal that he will follow the principal’s instructions and will neither intentionally nor negligently act improperly in the performance of the act. An agent cannot take personal advantage of the business opportunities the agency position uncovers. A principal-agent relationship is fiduciary, meaning these obligations bring forth a fiduciary relationship of trust and confidence. As such, an agency relationship is governed by employment law.
Medical malpractice cases are generally sought by patients who have been harmed or injured due to poor medical treatment or mistaken diagnosis from a medical provider such as a doctor, nurse, technician, hospital, or medical worker. The measure of whether a medical provider was “negligent,” or failed to provide proper care, turns on whether the patient would have received the same standard of care from another medical provider under similar circumstances. While the majority of health care providers aim to exercise the highest standard of care for all patents, there are times when things can go terribly wrong. If you or a loved one has experienced poor medical care, misdiagnosis, lack of consent, or breach of doctor of the patient confidentiality
This insurance ensures you by adjusting for the therapeutic costs of real wounds brought on to a man. It likewise secures you against cases of harm to the outsider's property. • Expert liability: In the event that you are a product advisor, handyman, contracted bookkeeper or any such expert offering your administration for value, the likelihood of confronting proficient liability is high. Proficient liability shields experts from dangers of liability coming about because of loss of information, cases including negligence, say, replicating of information, rupture of certainty, unintentional loss of information or coincidental mix-up by your representative.