The Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure have been amended to permit pleadings, motions, discovrey and briefs to be served via email.  Here is the new rule:

Here is the text of Rule 5.02(2):

(a)  Service upon any attorney may also be made by sending him or her the document in Adobe PDF format to the attorney’s email address, which shall be promptly furnished on request. The sender shall include language in the subject line designed to alert the recipient that a document is being served under this rule. On the date that a document served under this rule is electronically sent to an attorney, the sender shall send by mail, facsimile or hand-delivery a certificate that advises that a document has been transmitted electronically. The certificate shall state the caption of the action; the trial court file number; the title of the transmitted document; the number of pages of the transmitted document (including all exhibits thereto); the sender’s name, address, telephone number and electronic mail address; the electronic mail address of each recipient; and the date and time of the transmission. The certificate shall also include words to this effect: "If you did not receive this document, please contact the sender immediately to receive an electronic or physical copy of this document." The certificate shall be sent to all counsel of record.

This article from Newsweek reveals some interesting information on medical errors.

An excerpt:

Undoing a culture is hard, especially one steeped in hierarchy and intimidation, where doctors tend to reign supreme and nurses, pharmacists, and technicians fall into the ranks below. “What underlies it is arrogance,” says Pronovost, an anesthesiologist and director of Hopkins’s Quality and Safety Research Group. In his book he describes a run-in with a surgeon who refused to switch from latex to non-latex gloves during a hernia operation, despite Pronovost’s concern that the patient was having a potentially fatal latex-allergy reaction. It was only after a nurse picked up the phone to call the hospital president that the surgeon relented. “This patient,” Pronovost writes, “could have died from ignorance and arrogance—a lethal combination.”

Bill Leader reminded me the other day that you can access detailed information about Tennessee hospitals from the Tennessee Department of Health Website.   Here is the site.

There is a 40 + page PDF of information on each hospital.  Here is a list of the types of data for each hospital:

Identification

Bill Haslam is the Republican nominee for Governor of Tennessee.  I have never met the gentleman, but my friends who have say he is friendly and bright.  

Mr. Haslam’s latest  television commercial  calls for Tennesseans to address problems in health care, asking for more personal responsibility and tort reform in the scope of five seconds.

Readers know that  since at least 1975 "tort reform" has been advanced to protect doctors and hospitals from personal responsibility for their actions.  Through damage caps, artificial restrictions on who can testify as an expert, modification of the collateral source rule, and other measures, legislatures across the country have actively worked to reduce the personal responsibility of health care providers that harm patients.

Justice William C. Koch referenced an article by Joseph H. King, Jr.  about per diem arguments in his concurring opinion in Elliott v. CobbW2009-00961-SC-S09-CV  (Sept. 23, 2010).  Elliott recognized that lawyers in medical malpractice cases tried in Tennessee have a right to argue the monetary value of the case but cannot argue the amount sued for in the ad damnum.  Here is the majority opinion by Justice Sharon Lee.  Justice Koch’s concurrence made it clear that the Court was not addressing the issue of the appropriateness of per diem arguments.

 Professor King’s article is copywright protected so I cannot share it with you.  You can order the entire article on Westlaw or through the University of Tennessee Law Review.    The title of the article is "Counting Angels and Weighing Anchors:  Per Diem Arguments For Noneconomic Personal Injury Tort Damages."  It can be found at 71 Tenn. L. Rev. 1  (Fall 2003).

You can get a feel about the article from this language quoted from the article’s Conclusion:  "More fundamentally, per diem anchoring exacerbates the ill-defined nature of damages for pain and suffering. In so doing, per diem anchoring undermines the central goals of tort law."

More and more of the communications between lawyers are conducted by email.  For the most part, I approve of the change and, indeed, I proposed and served as the principle author of the new rule of civil procedure that allows for the service of papers in state court via email. T.R.C.P. Rule 5.02(2).  I rarely see the need for letters between lawyers anymore, and use letters only to communicate on very substantial matters (settlement demands, inadequate discovery response letters, policy limit demands, etc.).  Even then I tend to have the letter attached to an email for immediate delivery.

That being said, communicating by email presents a host of problems.  Therefore, I was happy to see this post by Rita Gunther Mcgrath that offered up "Rita’s Rules for Email."   Here they are (in bold), with my comments and additions:

 

1.  Meaningful subject lines that tell the reader what to expect.  Don’t say “Thursday’s meeting” as your subject.  Say “followup expected by client from Thursday’s meeting.”   (My case management program inserts the case name in the subject line.  To help find the emails later in my CMP, I put the subject of the email in the first line of the email and start the text two lines below it.  Given the layout of my CMP email screen, I can see the first twenty or thirty letters of each email and enhance my ability to find the email when I need it.)

Winning Trial Advocacy Tips has an excellent post on how to improve the reading of depositions at trial.

An excerpt:

4. Tab the appropriate pages.  Just like on the radio, you want to prevent the courtroom from filling with “dead air.”  When your witness is flipping through pages of the transcript, trying to find what portion he’s supposed to read next, it breaks the flow of your presentation and gives the jurors’ minds an opportunity to wander away.  Prevent “dead air” by tabbing the witness’s transcript, so he clearly understands which portion to flip to next.  Combined with the highlighting, this little bit of extra effort will make it much easier for your witness to smoothly present the transcript.

The first law review article on the topic of "Wrongful death of children in foster care" has recently been published in the University of La Verne Law Review, 31(1), 25-44.  The article is co-authored by Daniel Pollack, Professor, School of Social Work, Yeshiva University, and a frequent expert witness in child welfare and foster care cases, and Gary L. Popham, Jr., an attorney in Arizona.

The article surveys wrongful death cases filed in various states involving the death of children in foster care. Part I discusses wrongful death claims in general, and Part II discusses foster care. Part III discusses specific cases involving claims of wrongful death filed in various states which arose from the death of a child in foster care. Lastly, Part IV briefly reviews the key aspects of foster care wrongful death cases.

For a copy of "Wrongful death of children in foster care" please contact Professor Pollack at dpollack@yu.edu.

 

The Internet Cases blog alerted me to this case.  Apparently, plaintiffs counsel in a medical malpractice case began using his laptop to "Google" potential jurors to learn background information about them.  The Court questioned this effort as follows:

THE COURT: Are you Googling these [potential jurors]?

[PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL]: Your Honor, there’s no code law that says I’m not allowed to do that. I-any courtroom-

Contact Information