“We proceed to imagine that the decision in opposition to the hospital is legally unsupported as a result of Pennsylvania legislation doesn’t acknowledge ‘group legal responsibility’ and as a substitute requires that vicarious legal responsibility be based mostly on the negligent acts of a particularly recognized agent,” Maureen McBride, representing HUP, asserted.
Trending
- Microsoft Layoffs Hit Legal Department as AI Reshapes Staffing Strategy
- Netflix Used AI to Generate a Scene on a TV Show: ‘Thrilled’
- Miami Station Declares ABC Affiliation Loss ‘Independence Day’
- c2c moves to public ownership in GBR rollout
- Shalini Passi says she doesn’t colour her hair, uses ‘natural shampoo’ made with these simple ingredients | Lifestyle News
- How I Made Partner: 'Know Why You Are Working So Hard,' Says Sorell Negro of Brown Rudnick
- How 2 Stanford Grads Turned an Idea Into a WNBA Partnership
- ChatGPT Shopping, Product Feeds & the Future of Discovery
Friday, July 18
Superior Court Upholds $207.6M Birth Injury Judgment Against Penn Hospital
