To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

Cahoon v. Cummings

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cahoon v. Cummings
Seal of the Supreme Court of Indiana
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
Full case nameJeffrey S. Cahoon, M.D. and Shari A. Kohne and Edward L. Kennedy, Co-Executors of the Estate of Robert W. Kohne, M.D. v. Glessie Joann Cummings, wife of the deceased, William T. Cummings
DecidedSeptember 1, 2000
Citation(s)734 N.E.2d 535 (Ind. 2000)
15 Ohio St.3d 384
Case history
Prior action(s)715 N.E.2d 1, 9 (Ind.Ct.App.1999)
Court membership
Judge(s) sittingRandall Shepard
Brent Dickson
Frank Sullivan, Jr.
Theodore Boehm
Robert Rucker
Case opinions
Unanimous opinion by Boehm

Cahoon v. Cummings, 734 N.E.2d 535 (Ind. 2000), was a case decided by the Indiana Supreme Court that adopted the loss of a chance doctrine for tort liability.[1]

Decision

The plaintiff brought a wrongful death action alleging that the defendant doctor negligently failed to diagnose the decedent's esophageal cancer. The trial court instructed the jury to find the defendant liable if the failure to diagnose was deemed a substantial factor in the decedent's death. The jury found for the plaintiff and the defendant appealed.[2]

The Supreme Court of Indiana eschewed the substantial factor test for liability because it would unfairly hold doctors liable for the patient's underlying disease and all of the damage it caused. Instead the court adopted the loss of a chance doctrine, which allows recovery if negligence results in a substantially higher probability that harm to the plaintiff will result, even if the probability of harm is already over fifty percent. The court held that the defendants should only be held liable in proportion to the increased chance of harm caused by their negligence, and the case was remanded for a new trial.[3]

Impact

Cahoon places Indiana among 24 other states that recognize the loss of a chance doctrine, which has been criticized for unpredictably increasing medical malpractice liability.[4]

See also

References

External links

This page was last edited on 19 May 2024, at 03:24
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.