359 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16921588)
21. Worried in Wisconsin. With damage cap scrapped, panel will study options.
Robeznieks A
Mod Healthc; 2005 Aug; 35(34):56. PubMed ID: 16158568
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
22. Analysis of California's Medical Injury Compensation Review Act (MICRA).
Evans MB
J Med Pract Manage; 2004; 19(6):329-30. PubMed ID: 15293664
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
23. The anatomy of a lawsuit: Part 6.
Ashley RC
Crit Care Nurse; 2003 Aug; 23(4):89. PubMed ID: 12961788
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
24. Could a malpractice mega-verdict wipe you out?
Rice B
Med Econ; 2003 May; 80(10):89-91. PubMed ID: 12828031
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
25. [Indemnisation for medical and hospital damages. (Law no. 2002-1577 of December 30, 2002 relative to medical civil responsibility].
Villeneuve P
Rev Infirm; 2003 Feb; (88):45-7. PubMed ID: 12696358
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
26. Foiled again. Senate again fails to pass malpractice reform.
Fong T
Mod Healthc; 2004 Mar; 34(9):18. PubMed ID: 15029683
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
27. Wisconsin's caps on noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases: where Wisconsin stands (and should stand) on "tort reform".
Kenitz M
Spec Law Dig Health Care Law; 2006 May; (325):9-32. PubMed ID: 17009664
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
28. Dulling the Pain of Future Damages: High Court Ruling Addresses Periodic Payments.
Berlin J
Tex Med; 2020 Sep; 116(9):44-45. PubMed ID: 33023285
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Liability labs. Local experiments to resolve malpractice claims aims to be fairer to all sides.
Huff C
Hosp Health Netw; 2010 May; 84(5):40, 42-4. PubMed ID: 20575348
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Malpractice. Can no-fault work?
Weiss GG
Med Econ; 2004 Jun; 81(11):66-9, 71. PubMed ID: 15239646
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. The fifth element of negligence.
Ashley RC
Crit Care Nurse; 2004 Oct; 24(5):80-1. PubMed ID: 15526493
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
32. Malpractice payouts flat but premiums rise 120%.
Manag Care; 2005 Aug; 14(8):23. PubMed ID: 16173278
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. An empirical examination of the equal protection challenge to contingency fee restrictions in medical malpractice reform statutes.
Dwyer CL
Duke Law J; 2006 Nov; 56(2):611-41. PubMed ID: 17302005
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
34. Problems with the administration of remittitur in medical malpractice cases. Does a solution exist?
Keane DB
J Leg Med; 2004 Mar; 25(1):63-77. PubMed ID: 15204914
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
35. Keeping the cap. AMA won't back down from $250,000 limit.
Romano M
Mod Healthc; 2003 Jun; 33(25):25, 28. PubMed ID: 12858726
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
36. State liability reform trends: caps up, alternatives abound.
Sutton JH
Bull Am Coll Surg; 2004 Nov; 89(11):17-20. PubMed ID: 18435043
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. In his December 25 column of Connecticut Post, William A. Collins once again provided his imaginative overview of the medical liability insurance crisis.
Thomas KA
Conn Med; 2006 Apr; 70(4):281-3. PubMed ID: 16768079
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Tort reform. Where's the balance?
Guglielmo WJ
Med Econ; 2007 Jan; 84(2):70-3. PubMed ID: 17319643
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
39. Medical negligence cases in Sangli District of Maharashtra.
Yadav JU; Joshi JK
Indian J Public Health; 2007; 51(3):200. PubMed ID: 18229447
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
40. Medical professional liability crisis.
Nelson PB
Surg Neurol; 2004 Jan; 61(1):26-8. PubMed ID: 14706371
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
