Add to ORKGThe Court determined (1) when stating a claim for a negligence action in which medical monitoring is sought as a remedy, a plaintiff may satisfy the injury requirement by alleging that additional medical monitoring is reasonably required beyond the standard recommendations
The Court determined whether Nevada public policy precludes giving effect to a choice-of-law provisi...
The Court held that a claim of injury suffered during medical treatment may not be dismissed for lac...
The Court determined two issues: (1) when NRS 41A.097(2)’s three-year medical malpractice statute of...
Medical monitoring claims seek money damages for the costs of medical testing required after toxic e...
The Court reexamined whether NRS 41A.071\u27s affidavit-of-merit requirement applies to claims for p...
Medical malpractice denotes the basis for a civil action brought by a patient against a physician f...
The Court adopted an exception to the common law litigation privilege for legal malpractice and prof...
The Nevada Supreme Court held that a prior determination that an injury is industrially related may ...
The Court determined that an expert affidavit attached to a medical malpractice complaint, which oth...
Medical negligence claims have increased significantly over the last number of years. The trend is s...
This Note will examine the impact of the Shelton decision on requests for the production of hospital...
Appellant Szydel brought a medical malpractice claim against Dr. Markman after he left a surgical ne...
The Court considered, on appeal, the difference between “claims-made” coverage versus “occurrence” c...
Prior to the mid-1980s, tort law adhered to the traditional notion that the threat of future harm wa...
The Court determined that NRS 11.207(1), in regards to the two-year statute of limitations, is tolle...
The Court determined whether Nevada public policy precludes giving effect to a choice-of-law provisi...
The Court held that a claim of injury suffered during medical treatment may not be dismissed for lac...
The Court determined two issues: (1) when NRS 41A.097(2)’s three-year medical malpractice statute of...
Medical monitoring claims seek money damages for the costs of medical testing required after toxic e...
The Court reexamined whether NRS 41A.071\u27s affidavit-of-merit requirement applies to claims for p...
Medical malpractice denotes the basis for a civil action brought by a patient against a physician f...
The Court adopted an exception to the common law litigation privilege for legal malpractice and prof...
The Nevada Supreme Court held that a prior determination that an injury is industrially related may ...
The Court determined that an expert affidavit attached to a medical malpractice complaint, which oth...
Medical negligence claims have increased significantly over the last number of years. The trend is s...
This Note will examine the impact of the Shelton decision on requests for the production of hospital...
Appellant Szydel brought a medical malpractice claim against Dr. Markman after he left a surgical ne...
The Court considered, on appeal, the difference between “claims-made” coverage versus “occurrence” c...
Prior to the mid-1980s, tort law adhered to the traditional notion that the threat of future harm wa...
The Court determined that NRS 11.207(1), in regards to the two-year statute of limitations, is tolle...
The Court determined whether Nevada public policy precludes giving effect to a choice-of-law provisi...
The Court held that a claim of injury suffered during medical treatment may not be dismissed for lac...
The Court determined two issues: (1) when NRS 41A.097(2)’s three-year medical malpractice statute of...