Source: https://www.medicalmalpracticehelp.com/uncategorized/the-law-of-medical-malpractice-in-new-hampshire-a-survey-of-basic-considerations/
Timestamp: 2018-04-23 01:26:03
Document Index: 476797345

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 507', '§ 507', '§ 507', '§ 541', '§ 507', '§ 507']

The Law of Medical Malpractice in New Hampshire: A Survey of Basic Considerations | Medical Malpractice Help
The Law of Medical Malpractice in New Hampshire: A Survey of Basic Considerations
Home » Medical Malpractice News » The Law of Medical Malpractice in New Hampshire: A Survey of Basic Considerations
New Hampshire law refers to medical malpractice claims as an ‘action for medical injury’ and defines it as “any action against a medical care provider, whether based in tort, contract or otherwise, to recover damages on account of medical injury.” 2015 New Hampshire Revised Statutes (“RSA”) § 507-E:1 I. The term ‘medical injury’ is defined as:
any adverse, untoward or undesired consequences arising out of or sustained in the course of professional services rendered by a medical care provider, whether resulting from negligence, error, or omission in the performance of such services; from rendition of such services without informed consent or in breach of warranty or in violation of contract; from failure to diagnose; from premature abandonment of a patient or of a course of treatment; from failure properly to maintain equipment or appliances necessary to the rendition of such services; or otherwise arising out of or sustained in the course of such services. RSA § 507-E:1 III.
That as a proximate result thereof, the injured person suffered injuries which would not otherwise have occurred. RSA § 507-E:2 I.
Once the plaintiff has established the defendant’s negligence, i.e., the applicable standard of care was breached, the plaintiff must then prove that the negligence proximately caused the complained of injuries that would not otherwise have occurred. Bronson v. The Hitchcock Clinic, 140 N.H. 798, 801 (1996). The New Hampshire Supreme Court explained proximate cause as follows:
It is often the case that a single day is the difference between whether a plaintiff may commence an action or is time-barred because the limitations period has expired. Miscalculating when the last day of the limitations period is can literally result in an injured patient, even with a meritorious claim, being denied the chance at any recovery. As such, it is critical to understand how time is computed under New Hampshire law in calculating the exact date the applicable limitations period ends. Rule 2 of the Rules of the Superior Court of the State of New Hampshire sets forth how time is calculated. It states:
Tort claims against the state, any state agency, or any employee of the state are governed by RSA § 541-B:14. To the extent provided for in the statute and subject to the limitations therein, New Hampshire has waived sovereign immunity with respect to tort claims. The New Hampshire Supreme Court explained “the legislature intended this chapter to govern all claims against the State and/or its employees….” Laramie v. Stone, 999 A.2d 262, 277 (N.H. 2010). The Court added:
Damages against the state or its employees are capped at $475,000 per claimant and $3,750,000 per any single incident. RSA 541-B:14 I. Punitive damages are not available in actions against the state or its employees. Id.
As a condition precedent to commencement of the action, the clerk of the governmental unit shall be notified by registered mail within 60 days after the time of the injury or damage or discovery of the injury or damage, if it could not reasonably have been discovered at the time of the occurrence of the injury or damage, as to the date, time and location where the injury or damage occurred, and provided that in any case where lack of written notice, actual knowledge or reasonable opportunity to obtain knowledge of any injury or damage within the 60-day period is alleged by the governmental unit, the burden of proof shall be on the governmental unit to show that it was substantially prejudiced thereby.
If the plaintiff seeks a trial by jury, it must be stated in the complaint. Rule 8(b) states:
The term ‘family’ means “means spouse, parent, grandparent, stepfather, stepmother, child, adopted child, grandchild, brother, sister, half-brother, half-sister, father-in-law, or mother-in-law.” RSA § 507-E:4 I.
It is important to note that “a statement of fault, negligence, or culpable conduct that is part of or made in addition to a statement, writing, or action described in paragraph II” is not shielded from admissibility and thus may be used as evidence against the healthcare provider. RSA § 507-E:4 III.