Search for: "Doe v. Board of Medical Examiners"
Results 41 - 60
of 749
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Dec 2016, 6:14 am
His board certification in surgery does not directly relate to a matter at issue in the current case. [read post]
17 Mar 2017, 10:19 am
In a decision with significant implications for private hospitals, on March 7, 2017, the Third Circuit held in Doe v. [read post]
25 Jun 2023, 10:50 pm
On June 22, 2023, the Appeals Board issued an en banc decision in Nunes v. [read post]
17 Dec 2020, 6:44 am
This case, based on an investigation by the Texas State Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners (“TBVME”) into Dr. [read post]
26 Jun 2017, 3:26 pm
To raise an objection, a veteran needs to know the medical examiner’s credentials. [read post]
21 Oct 2015, 12:40 pm
In an independent medical examination, a physician concluded that the officer’s injury had aggravated preexisting osteoarthritis in his hip. [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 8:30 am
A common element in medical malpractice cases we have previously examined on this blog is the role of Louisiana's medical review panel. [read post]
30 Apr 2011, 5:08 am
Upon the completion of such examination the medical board shall report and certify to the board whether such beneficiary is or is not totally or partially incapacitated physically or mentally and whether he or she is or is not engaged in or able to engage in a gainful occupation. [read post]
6 Aug 2020, 1:10 pm
He said, “The law does not require that the child have a medical condition. . . . [read post]
19 Jul 2013, 3:40 am
Caymus Vineyards v. [read post]
13 May 2024, 6:00 am
Here, the conclusions of the Medical Board were supported by credible evidence, such as its independent interviews and examinations of the petitioner and its review of medical [*2]records from her treating physicians, including, inter alia, reports relating to multiple MRIs of her right knee (see Matter of Maxwell v New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., 210 AD3d at 1096; cf. [read post]
13 May 2024, 6:00 am
Here, the conclusions of the Medical Board were supported by credible evidence, such as its independent interviews and examinations of the petitioner and its review of medical [*2]records from her treating physicians, including, inter alia, reports relating to multiple MRIs of her right knee (see Matter of Maxwell v New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., 210 AD3d at 1096; cf. [read post]
25 Oct 2023, 10:25 am
Susan V. [read post]
5 Jun 2014, 8:17 am
See Vitronics Corp. v. [read post]
9 Sep 2016, 12:50 pm
The Supreme Court recognized as much in North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. [read post]
10 Jan 2013, 4:00 am
In Baker v. [read post]
22 Oct 2019, 3:49 am
Goodman).Similarity of the goods and trade channels/consumers: Examining Attorney Mark S. [read post]
14 Oct 2016, 11:30 am
In order to stay in compliance with federal Antitrust laws (see NC State Board of Dental Examiners v. [read post]
14 Oct 2016, 11:30 am
In order to stay in compliance with federal Antitrust laws (see NC State Board of Dental Examiners v. [read post]
21 Sep 2011, 5:12 pm
This might be a great outcome for malpractice insurance companies and their doctors, but it does nothing for people who have been injured by the negligence of a medical professional. [read post]
