For your session-long project, you will be performing a case study analysis. The case was first discussed in module 1 SLP. The case you are using is the Robert Courtney case.

The analysis will be divided into five parts, one part for each module.

The framework for the Session Long Project and for generally conducting the case study:

Module 1 – Criminal Law/Contract Law
Module 2 – Tort Law
Module 3 – Vicarious Liability
Module 4 – Role of Allied Health Professionals
Module 5 – Patient Consent/Patient Rights and Responsibilities/End of Life
MODULE 3 ASSIGNMENT:

For this Module you will need to complete the following tasks. This section will be added to the end of your Module 2 submission.

Identify and discuss the concept of vicarious liability.
Based upon your research and assessment of the case, is there sufficient evidence to suggest that this concept can be substantiated in this case? Explain why or why not?
In this case, what organizational parties could be held liable and why?
Are there any grounds to find the patients liable?
Session Long Project Assignment Expectations

Length: SLP assignments should be at least 2 to 3 pages in length, double-spaced.

References: At least two references should be included from academic sources (e.g. peer-reviewed journal articles). Required readings are included. As much as possible use your own words and build on the ideas of others. When material is copied verbatim from external sources, it MUST be enclosed in quotes. The references should be cited within the text and also listed at the end of the assignment in the References section (preferably in APA format).

Organization: Subheadings should be used to organize your paper according to question

Format: APA format is recommended (but not required) for this assignment. See Syllabus page for more information on APA format.

Grammar and Spelling: While no points are deducted, assignments are expected to adhere to standards guidelines of grammar, spelling, punctuation, and sentence syntax. Points may be deducted if grammar and spelling impact clarity.

The following items will be assessed in particular:

Relevance (e.g. all content is connected to the question)
Precision (e.g. specific question is addressed. Statements, facts, and statistics are specific and accurate).
Depth of discussion (e.g. present and integrate points that lead to deeper issues)
Breadth (e.g. multiple perspectives and references, multiple issues and factors considered)
Evidence (e.g. points are well-supported with facts, statistics and references)
Logic (e.g. presented discussion makes sense, conclusions are logically supported by premises, statements, or factual information)
Clarity (e.g. writing is concise, understandable, and contains sufficient detail or examples)
Objectivity (e.g. avoid use of first person and subjective bias)

REQUIRED READINGS

Anselmi, K. (2012). Ethics, Law, and Policy. Nurses’ Personal Liability vs. Employer’s Vicarious Liability. MEDSURG Nursing, 21(1): 45-8.

DeKaye, A. & Naclerio, G. (2012). Suits and scrubs avoiding orange jumpsuits — volume II: The metamorphosis crook Journal of Health Care Compliance, 14(3),13-18.

Giliker, P. (2011). Vicarious liability or liability for the acts of others in tort: A comparative perspective. Journal of European Tort Law, 2(1), 31-56.

McGinnis, K. (n.d.). Focus on misclassification of workers as independent contractors in the healthcare industry: Are you ready to be audited? Retrieved from http://www.naylornetwork.com/ahh-nwl/articles/index-v2.asp?aid=126671&issueID=22496

Moses, R. & Jones, D. (2011). Physician assistants in health care fraud: Vicarious liability. Journal of Health Care Compliance, 13(2), 51-75.

Norton v Argonaut Insurance Co. 144 So. 2d 249 (La. Ct. App. 1962). Retrieved from http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=1962393144So2d249_1357.xml&docbase=CSLWAR1-1950-1985

OPTIONAL READINGS

Baez, H. (2009). Volunteers, victims, and vicarious liability: Why tort law should recognize altruism. University of Louisville Law Review, 48 (2), 221-264.

Bright, L. (2008). Death by corporate negligence. Nursing Older People, 20(4), 14.

Medili, C. (2011). The federal common law of vicarious fiduciary liability under ERISA. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 44(2), 249-313.

Rothermel, C. (2011). Hybrid torts and vicarious liability under the Jones Act: Testing the limits of course and scope.Journal Tulane Maritime Law Journal, 36(1), 289-311.

Saunier, B. (2011). The devil is in the details: Managed care and the unforeseen costs of utilization review as a cost containment mechanism. Issues in Law & Medicine, 27(1), 21-48.