You must log in or register to comment.
It seems like the headline is deliberately written to be funny (I did get a good laugh out of it) and the actual event isn’t quite as nottheoniony. My understanding is that the court faced the question of whether the lawsuit could proceed against the doctor individually, or against the insurance company. It’s bizzare but rather unsurprising and understandable that the lawyers of a doctor faced with such a claim would try, even if it’s likely to fail, to have it pushed via the insurance company.
The court made the right decision of course, but this just seems like business as usual for lawsuits.
Its a bit worse than that, as I understand it.
It would have to be proven as medical malpractice, which would be much harder. It was a legal ploy to avoid any consequences.
Note that this is based on my layman understanding and other articles I’ve read on this, as well as comments from a few people in the medical industry I know (doctor, two nurses, and a friend in biotech).
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Utah = bad or whatever
There’s only so much a court can do in the face of a hostile and unrepresentative legislature, but to its credit, Utah’s supreme court has refused to let a near total abortion ban take effect, and just in the last day they slapped down the legislature’s attempt to gerrymander the state against the will of the people.
Believe it or not, even with almost all the power in the state held by the Mormons, with some of their crazy beliefs, Utah actually has a lot of sensible legislation on the books and regularly makes common sense rulings easily.
Yeah but they only did that so the insurance wouldn’t have to cover it
