This month’s Legal eSpeaking post discusses a case in which the plaintiff obtained direct access to inspect a defendant’s EHR as part of discovery.
Healthcare providers are required by law to offer appropriate auxiliary aids to hearing-impaired patients. What might be the consequences for failing to do so?
What might happen when a healthcare provider is asked to produce a large volume of electronic patient records at great expense?
Personalized medicine made the news recently when, on April 6, 2017, the FDA allowed the marketing of 23andMe’s genetic health risk tests for ten diseases or conditions.
This month’s post focuses on a case that arose out of a data breach, which led to a class action where the plaintiffs alleged the defendant owed a legal duty to keep their information safe and prevent system vulnerabilities.
Healthcare providers may affiliate with third parties to perform various services. Not surprisingly, when such a third party commits what is alleged to be a wrongful act of some sort, such as a misdiagnosis or mistreatment, the injured individual might attempt to hold the healthcare provider responsible.