India has been following English law for certain principles that are well developed in common law. On the issue of medical negligence, India had adopted the principle laid down in the Bolam case which held that a doctor is not negligent if what he has done would be endorsed by a responsible body of medical opinion in the relevant specialty at the material time. This was followed until 2001 when...

In the U.S. physicians and other medical providers are subject to a negligence rule of liability. Under a negligence rule a patient who is injured as a result of medical care is entitled to compensation only if he or she can show that the injury was caused by the physician's failure to take due care. Given a finding of liability, compensation is determined by a civil jury. In recent years the f...

A promisor is strictly liable for breaching a contract, according to the standard account. However, a negligence-based system of contract law can be given an economic interpretation, and this Article shows that such a system is in some respects more attractive than the strict-liability system. This may explain why, as a brief discussion of cases shows, negligence ideas continue to play a role i...

This article unwraps the nature and source of human errors involved in Radiology, revealing unique elements of the specialty that warrant special consideration in medical malpractice cases. The authors compare these errors to negligent practices in other professions and conclude that a general concept of negligence cannot adequately address the complexities of decision-making in Radiology. Afte...

v. Papastavros, 323 Conn. 275 (Sept. 27, 2016), the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that expert testimony is required to establish the element of causation in a legal malpractice case. Thus, even where an attorney’s performance was deficient, if the plaintiff cannot present expert testimony that the outcome of her case would have been different but for the attorney’s negligence, the attorney wi...