Evidence of Negligence
Negligence refers to the failure of health care professionals to exercise the duty of care due to their patients. Negligence comes in when the health care professionals do not take the necessary actions in a given situation as demanded by their career. In a court of law, the plaintiff may present various pieces of evidence for the carelessness of the health care officers.
Direct evidence
Statutory evidence where there is a violation of law: In this case, there is a duty of care owed to a certain person who is protected by the statutes. Thus, a violation of this duty calls for statutory evidence. The plaintiff can provide statutory evidence in court as he/she has been covered (Pozgar, 62).
Policies and procedures evidence: Health care facilities have day-to-day organizational operations. One may use this evidence if a violation of these policies and procedures causes injuries to those that it is meant to protect.
- Demonstrative evidence: this is evidence that can be demonstrated in court.
- Documentary evidence: this is evidence that has been documented and can be presented before the court.
- Judicial notice evidence: these are adjudicative facts.
- Hearsay evidence: this is from the evidence that cannot be authenticated.
- Expert testimony: this is used when issues to be resolved are beyond common knowledge and understanding.
Defenses on Negligence
The defendant may refute the plaintiffs’ evidence when the ignorance of a fact was unintentional. Assumption of risk: this is where the risk involved is assumed, leading to the occurrence of negligence. Contributory negligence: in this case, the defendant argues that the plaintiff contributed to the negligence. They may defend themselves using comparative negligence, statute limitation, and sovereign immunity. Intervening causes is where there is a force that takes effect after the defendant’s negligence, which causes significant harm to the plaintiff (Pozgar, 104).
Statutes of limitation
The statutes limit the time for prosecution and hence favor defendants who may have lost evidence. It protects them from the cruelty of long-dormant claims.
Damages
- Normal: a token of recognition that a wrong has been committed, and the value is usually insignificant.
- Compensatory: awarded as reparation for injury sustained.
- Hedonic: awarded to compensate the plaintiff for loss of life enjoyment.
- Punitive: monetary compensation for an injury caused by disregard of others’ safety.
Provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was enacted in the early 2000s. It was assented to by President George Bush. There are various provisions related to this legislation. These include the following:
- Financial reports have to be certified.
- Injunction on personal loans for the top management.
- Prevention of insider trading. This is especially during pension fund blackout.
- Public reporting of the Chief Executive and Chief Finance Officers’ compensations and profits.
- Independence of inside auditors
- Criminal and Civil penalties for securities violations.
- Obligations of having internal audits that are certified by external auditors.
- Code of ethics and standards of conduct for executive officers and board members.
- The Act provides for significantly longer jail terms for corporate executives who mistake and alter the financial statements of the company knowingly (Pozgar and Santucci, 96).
Respondent superior
Respondent superior is a legal doctrine that stands for “Let the Master respond”. The doctrine holds employers liable for the wrongful acts of their employees. It also means that the employer is also answerable for torts committed by their employees (Pozgar and Santucci, 97).
Works Cited
Pozgar, George D. Legal Aspects of Health Care Administration. Sudbury, Mass: Jones & Bartlett Learning, 2012. Print.
Pozgar, George D, and Nina M. Santucci. Legal Essentials of Health Care Administration. Sudbury, Mass: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2009. Print.