Direct Liability
Research on Health Law course. The following are the subjects for the Hospital Liability,

B. Hospital Liability
Direct Liability
Washington v. Washington Hospital Center (1990) p. 456
Ordinary negligence where hospital failed to provide doctors with appropriate monitoring equipment.
Standard of care can be concluded by a juror without expert testimony.
Direct responsibilities of hospitals: minimum facility and support systems, adequate staffing, adequate equipment, on-call systems.
Negligent Credentialing (Selection and retention of competent physicians)
See peer review section below
Nondelegable Duty/Corporate Negligence: Supervision of all providers and practitioners on the premises (minority view of duty of due care).
Darling v. Charleston Hospital (1965) p. 466
The Hosptial has an obligation to check up on the doctor’s and evaluate the standard of care being used.
Thompson v. Nason Hospital (1991) p. 470
Corporate negligence is a doctrine under which the hospital is liable if it fails to uphold the proper standard of care owed the patient, which is to ensure the patient’s safety and well being while at the hospital.
This theory of liability creates a nondelegable duty which the hospital owes directly to a patient. Therefore, an injured party does not have to rely on and establish the negligence of a third party.
Rule: the hospital is liable if it fails to uphold the proper standard of care owed its patient. Requirements:
Actual or constructive knowledge of the defect or procedures which created the harm.
Four Duties:
A duty to use reasonable care in the maintenance of safe and adequate facilities and equipment;
A duty to select and retain only competent physicians;
A duty to oversee all persons who practice medicine within its walls as to patient care; and
A duty to formulate, adopt, and enforce adequate rules and policies to ensure quality care for its patients.
Vicarious Liability: Plaintiff must how all the elements of the underlying tort (for example, negligence with respect to the doctor, nurse, technician, etc., AND one of the following, to prove that the Defendant (hospital) is liable for that actor’s action because of:
Actual Agency (Scott v. SSM Healthcare 2002 p. 441)
Requires (1) principal must consent to the agent’s acting on the principals’ behalf; and (2) the agent must be subject to the principal’s control.
While the hospital allows the physician a lot of freedom, there is still the relationship because of several facts (hospital provides equipment, exclusively, sets prices, provides nurses, etc).
Apparent Agency (Burless v. WV 2004 p. 445)
Rule: For a hospital to be held liable for a physician’s negligence under an apparent agency theory, a plaintiff must establish that: (1) the hospital either committed an act that would cause a reasonable person to believe that the physician in question was an agent of the hospital, or by failing to take an action, created a circumstance that would allow a reasonable person to hold such a belief, and (2) the plaintiff relied on the apparent agency relationship.
So, how does a hospital avoid liability? Explicit language in consent form to put patient on notice of the physician’s legal status.

 
The Instruction

I. Introduction: describe a problem

II. Then to say what is the law is saying. 2 cases on the matter.

II. Then how we can solve the problem.

Please you need to use the legal format for this outlines.