Apparent Agency gets updated.

Tennessee has struggled for a while to truly determine whether or not a doctor is an agent of a hospital when they are working as a contract laborer.  I’ve had a problem with hospital’s escaping liability for one of their doctors, simply because they pay him or her with a 1099 form and not as an employee.

It appears that our old and relative unclear way of determining whether or not a hospital can be held liable for the actions of a doctor has come to an end.  The recent opinion issued by the Tennessee Supreme Court is  Boren v. Weeks and it was released on May 6th.  On page 10 of the opinion, it states:

To hold a hospital vicariously liable for the negligent or wrongful acts of an independent contractor physician, a plaintiff must show that:

1. the hospital held itself out to the public as providing medical services;
2. the plaintiff looked to the hospital rather than to the individual physician to perform those services; and
3. the patient accepted those services in the reasonable belief that the services were provided by the hospital or a hospital employee.

So what’s this mean for the general public?  The above criteria is much easier to work with when one is trying to determine whether or not a hospital should be held liable for the errors of those they hire, regardless of whether or not those medical professionals are paid with a 1099 form or not.

This entry was posted on May 22, 2008 at 7:55 am and is filed under Injury Law. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.