WITNESSES HOSPITAL NEGLIGENCE
EXPERT
BOARD-CERTIFIED TESTIFYING EXPERTS
other data to workers who were exposed to its products; c. In 1971, Union Carbide deter-
mined that it would be prudent to treat its asbestos like other asbestos, but continued to intimate in letters to customers that its asbestos was differ- ent and safer (including a letter to Dow Chemical’s engineers); d. One of Union Carbide’s cus-
tomers, Hamilton Materials, testified that he was told by Union Carbide that the dangers of asbestos were “no big deal” and that it would “blow over”; e. A memo in 1972 suggested less
than frank and full dealing with cus- tomers, stating that Union Carbide sales persons should “control the mood” and psychologically intimidate their customers to continue buying their asbestos. Thus, when the Court of Appeal
turned to evaluate the Due Process stan- dards, the court was able to reject Union Carbide’s argument that its conduct was on the “low end” of the
reprehensibility scale.” The Stewart court found that: Plaintiffs’ case was that Union
Carbide profited from the sale of a dangerous substance, that it knew the dangers of its product, that it failed to warn consumers of those dangers, and Larry Stewart developed a fatal cancer as a result. The appellate court then upheld the
$6 million punitive damages verdict, which was less than 10:1 damages ratio based on the $2.2 million in economic losses. At oral argument, one of the jus- tices asked defense counsel essentially ‘why isn’t this conduct atrocious’? Specifically, the appellate court rejected Union Carbide’s ‘spin’ on the memoran- da and documents, holding that the jury could reasonably view the documents as it did.
Amerigraphics v. Mercury Casualty: Right facts, wrong ruling?
While the Stewart case demonstrates unambiguously when “despicable” behavior
Hospital Administration Arthur Shorr, M.B.A., FACHE Daniel Herlinger, M.B.A., FACHE Norman Andrews, R.N., M.B.A., FACHE Tim Hawkins, M.B.A., FACHE
Psychiatric Facilities Gerald Sweet Ph.D Berlynn Ching, R.N.
Nursing Administration Bonnie Siler, R.N., M.A.
Nursing Homes, Assisted Living Julian Rich, M.B.A., FACHCA
· Community Standards · Patient Rights
· Physician Credentialing · Policies & Procedures · Nursing Negligence · Regulatory Compliance · Environment of Care · Patient Safety
· Bylaws & Governance · JCAHO Standards
Call for Courtesy Consultation
800.530.5728
Autopsy: The Final Diagnosis... Rely on our expert opinions for your next wrongful death case.
• Independent Postmortem Exams • Neuropathology Consultation • Forensic Toxicology Testing
• DNA Testing • Medical Records Review/ Causation Analysis
Marvin Pietruszka, M.D., J.D, F.C.A.P Certified by American Board of Pathology and American Board of Forensic Toxicology
Forensic Autopsy Services • (310)779-3279
pathologymd@aol.com
www.HospitalExperts.com JULY 2011 The Advocate Magazine — 79
A Subsidiary of Arthur S. Shorr & Associates, Inc.
PLAINTIFF...
...OR DEFENSE
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104