Lemuz Ex Rel. Lemuz v. Fieser

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding medical malpractice insurance minimums mandated by state law provided substitute for ban on corporate negligence claim against hospital providing staff privileges to tortfeasor-doctor
• explaining that recognizing a new duty does not alter the traditional elements of a negligence cause of action
• “Peer review has the potential to lower malpractice incidents, thereby lowering malpractice rates and thereby encouraging doctors to practice in Kansas.”
• abrogation of corporate negligence doctrine preventing plaintiffs from seeking remedy against hospitals for breach of a duty owed under common law implicates Section 18
• In considering the adequacy of the quid pro quo of comprehensive legislation that substitutes a statutory remedy for one that formerly existed at common law, 'no hard and fast rule can apply to all cases.'
• In considering the adequacy of the quid pro quo of comprehensive legislation that substitutes a statutory remedy for one that formerly existed at common law, 'no hard and fast rule can apply to all cases.'

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).