Lesson Plan October 4, 2012 TORTS: Civil wrong other than breach of contract, where one party is found

culpable to the other by courts and is responsible in the form of decision, and damages (money related to property, Personal and real) In addition these actions can touch on personal and professional levels as well as both. Especially true of those in the health care profession. Objectives of torts: Preservation of the piece by providing a substitute for retaliation. Instead of jail as under criminal law actions not considered serious enough to constitute jail time so look to money damages; determine culpability (who is at fault); deterrence to discourage wrongdoer from committing further wrongs; compensation and to protect injured person further, future wrongdoings. Negligence is an act caused by carelessness, recklessness and a disregard what a reasonable person would do under same or similar circumstances. Under these considerations it can occur where one has considered the consequences of an act and exercised their best judgment under the circumstances; failing to guard against an appreciable risk; engaging in a behavior expected to involve unreasonable risk to others. Commission of an Act: Administering wrong dosages; misread drs notes give wrong meds and/or amounts of drugs; give to wrong patient; failing to get consent and or giving informed consent; removing wrong body parts or wrong patient; failing to keep med record notes in normal course of duties etc; Omission of Act: failing to do that which is required of a nurse practitioner. Failing to admininster meds; failing to follows drs orders. Failing to observe patients and report anything out of the ordinary. Negligence generally requires malfeasance execution of an unlawful or improper act; misfeasanceimproper performance of an act resulting in injury, Nonfeasance, failure to act in circumstances where the reasonably prudent person would act in the same or similar circumstances. Malpractice is the negligence of a professional person i. e. accountant, dr, lawyer, nurse. What distinguishes the difference between professional negligence and every day person negligence? Describe the several factors related thereto. Negligence: The King of all torts. It is the unintentional commission of an action that a reasonable person in the same or similar circumstances would not have committed under the same or similar circumstances. Elements are (1) the existence of a duty of care, (2) a breach of that duty; (3) injury directly related to the breach of that duty and (4) damages directly associated with the injury directly related to the damages. I. Duty of care: The existence must be established as a result of the relationship. Some permanent and temporary. The duty must be in existence at the time of the injury. Duty can also be established by contract and statue. Give examples; hosp guidelines for patient care; professional code of conduct.Manufacturing standards set by government Is it necessary to know person before duty established? Standard of care created by what

II.

III.

IV.

reasonable person would do under same or similar circumstances. Those circumstances may differ based upon what is required of the duty. Ie greater education, experience and training based upon the type of relation from which the duty arose. Give examples of different levels of expected standard of care. Review Hastings v. Baton Rouge Hospital pg 197. Breach of the Duty: After establishing the existence of the duty, the breach must be established by failure to maintain the existence of the required standard of care which may encompass doing or not doing what was required. (Omission or Commission) Talk about duty of hospital to physicians and patient and in this case who really breached duty to patient and if there is another cause of action and the potential parties to this action. Injury actually related to and caused as a result of the breach of the duty owed and standard of care. There must be a harm or injury caused and directly related. There may be negligence that does not result in damages or injury or even if it does may be sufficiently remote as not to be forseeable. Causation, there must be a close and proximate relation between the injury and breach resulting in damages. Foreseabillity and Anticipation of harm. The test is not what the wrongdoer believed it is whether he or she ought reasonably to have foreseen that the event in question or some similar event would occur. Discuss Niles v City of san Rafael.

Duty of care is one of responsibilities to do the right thing; Not only legal issues but ethical issues. Discuss differences between two cases. B. INTENTIONAL TORTS; Action committed deliberately in violation of standard of care. Can be said that person intended harmful consequences of his actions. 1. Assault and Battery- Assault infringes upon mental security. Person must be aware of threat and appreciate the actors apparent ability to carry out the threat. And without consent. 2. Battery- the unwanted contact with another without their consent. Unlike assault the victim does not have to be aware of the battery and no actual damages have to be shown in order to establish liability. 3. False imprisonmentUnlawful restraint of a persons indi idual liberty. Intimidation such that the person feels threatened and or intimidate and cannot leave though unrestrained. Physical confinement is all that is necessary. The threat can be implied by words, gestures and/or just a general atmosphere of intimidation that adds to the perception that one is not free to leave. 4. Defamation of characterCommunication to a third party (oral) about a person that holds another persons reputation up to scorn and ridicule knowing such statements to be false when made. 5. Slander- is the oral form of communication to a third party. 6. Libel- written communication to a third party of knowingly false statement intended to injure and damage ones reputation in the community.

Four exceptions wherebv no proof required of actual harm to reputation is required; a) accusing someone of a crime; b) accusing someone of having loathsome disease; c) using words to affect a persons business reputation or profession; accusing someone of sexual misconduct. 7. Invasion of privacyEveryone has constitutional right to privacy. Patients especially where their medical records and personal information are kept are entitled to not have information leaked and cannot be disclosed without patients consent. Examples of when law requires disclosures? 8. Intentional Infliction of Emotional DistressConduct so outrageous, reckless and intentional that it offends causing public humiliation, embarrassment, shame and the actions were intended to do so. Situation where recovery for damages is permitted even without physical harm. Tomcik v. Ohio Dept. of Rehabilitation & correction.