HADM 3700 Final Exam with All Correct & 100% Verified
Answers |Actual Complete Exam| Guaranteed to Pass
1. Corporate Doctrine under which the hospital is liable if it fails to uphold the proper
Negli- gence standard of care owed to the patient
-liability from a breach of owed directly to the patient by the hospital
corporation
2. What kind of
li- ability is Direct liability
involved in 1. Stems from the hospital's duty to ensure competent statt, proper
corporate neg- credentials, and quality monitoring of care
ligence? 2. so, if the hospital breaches a standard of care in regards to the
patient, it is direct liability for the hospital
3. But if the employee (doctor, nurse, etc) commits a negligent
act, then it's vicariously liability for the hospital
3. Direct Liability (for liability that is attributed to the wrongdoer
corporations)
4. example of Darling v. Charleston Community Memorial Hospital
direct liability -Hospital failed to provide adequate oversight of a doctor, resulting in the
in the cor- patient losing a leg because of a tight cast
porate world -First time a court found that a corporation should be directly liable
— duty to their hospital
-Required physicians to keep up with training
5. Respondeat Supe- "Let the master respond"
rior
6. why is respondeat Because employers are vicariously liable for the negligence of their
employees
superior fair?? -Employers are vicariously liable for the negligence of their employees
because employers have the ability to control the employee's work but
the negligent act must occur within the course and scope of their
employment
1/
43
,HADM 3700 Final Exam with All Correct & 100% Verified
Answers |Actual Complete Exam| Guaranteed to Pass
7. Respondeat Supe- -Doctors found liable for the negligent acts of the nurses, assistants,
etc who are
rior typical cases:working under their control
-Hospitals found liable for negligent acts of the doctors
2/
43
,HADM 3700 Final Exam with All Correct & 100% Verified
Answers |Actual Complete Exam| Guaranteed to Pass
8. Borrowed -Respondeat superior may not be limited to "employees" of the
servant (loaned doctor
servant) rule -No employer-employee relationship exists, but the liability shifts to the
tempo- rary employer fs they control the servant's action
9. Vicarious Liability: Legal doctrine that assigns liability for an injury to a person who did
not cause
the injury (employer) but who has a particular legal relationship to the
person who did act negligently (employee/agent)
Referred to as "imputed negligence"
-Indirect, legal responsibility for the acts of agents/employees
-"Liability for the negligence of another"
10. imputed legal relationships that can lead to imputed negligence include the
negli- relationship between parent and child, employer and employee,
gence: principal and agent
11. Indirect, le- all employees are agents, not all agents are employees
gal
responsibili-
ty for the
acts of
agents/em-
ployees--->
12. Question in deter- 1. Did the Doctrine apply?
mining whether exist?" Re- quires:
the doctrine
ap- plies:
13. "Did the
relation- ship
3/
43
, HADM 3700 Final Exam with All Correct & 100% Verified
Answers |Actual Complete Exam| Guaranteed to Pass
2. Did the act occur within
the course and scope of the
agency?
-An express or implied
manifestation of consent by
the principal that the agent
acted on his behalf
-An acceptance of the
undertaking by the agent
-An understanding between
the two that the activities of
the agent are under the
control of the principal
-Was the agent under the
principal's control and acting
on their behalf?
4/
43
Answers |Actual Complete Exam| Guaranteed to Pass
1. Corporate Doctrine under which the hospital is liable if it fails to uphold the proper
Negli- gence standard of care owed to the patient
-liability from a breach of owed directly to the patient by the hospital
corporation
2. What kind of
li- ability is Direct liability
involved in 1. Stems from the hospital's duty to ensure competent statt, proper
corporate neg- credentials, and quality monitoring of care
ligence? 2. so, if the hospital breaches a standard of care in regards to the
patient, it is direct liability for the hospital
3. But if the employee (doctor, nurse, etc) commits a negligent
act, then it's vicariously liability for the hospital
3. Direct Liability (for liability that is attributed to the wrongdoer
corporations)
4. example of Darling v. Charleston Community Memorial Hospital
direct liability -Hospital failed to provide adequate oversight of a doctor, resulting in the
in the cor- patient losing a leg because of a tight cast
porate world -First time a court found that a corporation should be directly liable
— duty to their hospital
-Required physicians to keep up with training
5. Respondeat Supe- "Let the master respond"
rior
6. why is respondeat Because employers are vicariously liable for the negligence of their
employees
superior fair?? -Employers are vicariously liable for the negligence of their employees
because employers have the ability to control the employee's work but
the negligent act must occur within the course and scope of their
employment
1/
43
,HADM 3700 Final Exam with All Correct & 100% Verified
Answers |Actual Complete Exam| Guaranteed to Pass
7. Respondeat Supe- -Doctors found liable for the negligent acts of the nurses, assistants,
etc who are
rior typical cases:working under their control
-Hospitals found liable for negligent acts of the doctors
2/
43
,HADM 3700 Final Exam with All Correct & 100% Verified
Answers |Actual Complete Exam| Guaranteed to Pass
8. Borrowed -Respondeat superior may not be limited to "employees" of the
servant (loaned doctor
servant) rule -No employer-employee relationship exists, but the liability shifts to the
tempo- rary employer fs they control the servant's action
9. Vicarious Liability: Legal doctrine that assigns liability for an injury to a person who did
not cause
the injury (employer) but who has a particular legal relationship to the
person who did act negligently (employee/agent)
Referred to as "imputed negligence"
-Indirect, legal responsibility for the acts of agents/employees
-"Liability for the negligence of another"
10. imputed legal relationships that can lead to imputed negligence include the
negli- relationship between parent and child, employer and employee,
gence: principal and agent
11. Indirect, le- all employees are agents, not all agents are employees
gal
responsibili-
ty for the
acts of
agents/em-
ployees--->
12. Question in deter- 1. Did the Doctrine apply?
mining whether exist?" Re- quires:
the doctrine
ap- plies:
13. "Did the
relation- ship
3/
43
, HADM 3700 Final Exam with All Correct & 100% Verified
Answers |Actual Complete Exam| Guaranteed to Pass
2. Did the act occur within
the course and scope of the
agency?
-An express or implied
manifestation of consent by
the principal that the agent
acted on his behalf
-An acceptance of the
undertaking by the agent
-An understanding between
the two that the activities of
the agent are under the
control of the principal
-Was the agent under the
principal's control and acting
on their behalf?
4/
43
