What do I do if am being sued?
Step 1: Take a deep breath and try to relax. Not to minimize a medical malpractice suit and the stress inherit in being named in one, but life will go on and worse things can and do happen in life.

Step 2: Immediately upon receiving notice of a lawsuit or the potential for a suit, mail a copy of whatever papers you have received to your medical malpractice carrier and call the carrier to advise it of the claim. If you are employed by a health care organization or hospital, the risk manager of that organization should be immediately notified and he or she will assist you.

What is the relationship between my insurance carrier and me?
Fortunately, in Vermont there is almost always an excellent working relationship between insurance carriers, defense counsel, and the physician. The cornerstone of that relationship is trust; the physician must be comfortable with and confident in his or her defense team. In that regard, most medical malpractice insurance carriers will consider a physician’s request for a specific attorney, provided that attorney has expertise in medical malpractice litigation. An important factor in this relationship is an early meeting between the physician and defense counsel not only to discuss the substance of the case, but also to address all questions and concerns the physician may have.

Must the carrier have my best interest in mind? What happens if our interests diverge?
The carrier has fiduciary and contractual obligations to act in the best interest of its insured. In the rare instances where a divergence of interests develops, e.g., a dispute as to coverage, it is important for the physician to consider retaining personal counsel to guarantee that his or her interests are protected.

Should a physician ever talk to the plaintiff-patient after a lawsuit has begun?
Like it or not, once a lawsuit has been filed the physician and patient/former patient are in an adversarial posture. As a result, there should be no communication between the physician and that former patient, particularly with respect to any subject implicated by the lawsuit. The safest course of action before taking any significant steps after the filing of the lawsuit is for the physician to speak to his or her attorney to obtain guidance and direction.

On a related note, the physician should keep separate from the patient’s chart and clearly mark as “attorney/client communications not for release,” all communications to and from the physician from his or her insurance carrier and/or legal counsel in order to protect the attorney client privilege.

What must a plaintiff-patient prove to recover on a claim of medical malpractice?
In a medical malpractice action brought against a health care professional in Vermont, the plaintiff-patient has the burden of proving:

This statute creates an objective, national standard of care in which the defendant’s conduct is to be measured against what a reasonable health care professional in a similar practice would have done in the same or similar circumstances. Stated differently, health care professionals are expected to deliver health care with the same degree of care and skill that is ordinarily possessed and exercised in like cases by professionals in the same general line of practice. The failure to do so is medical malpractice.

This does not mean that a physician is required to be infallible.[2] A physician will not be held liable for malpractice as a result of a “mere error in judgment,” meaning that a physician may choose from several appropriate treatment alternatives and the mere fact that harm results from the physician’s choice of one alternative over the other is not necessarily malpractice.[3] This also means that the standard of care does not require a health care professional to guarantee a good result. If the provider meets the standard of care for his or her profession, then he or she will not be found liable for malpractice regardless of the result of the treatment.[4]

What type of evidence must a plaintiff-patient produce in order to meet her burden of proof on a medical malpractice claim?
Generally, to meet his or her burden of proof in a medical malpractice action, the plaintiff-patient must present expert medical testimony setting forth:

An exception to this general rule exists in those cases where the violation of the standard of medical care is so apparent to be comprehensible to any ordinary lay person.[6] For instance, when a health care professional treats the wrong patient or body part, the plaintiff is not required to present expert testimony to support his or her claim since the violation of the standard of care is obvious to anyone.

What types of damages can a plaintiff-patient recover in a medical malpractice action?
Both compensatory and punitive damages may be awarded in a medical malpractice case. Compensatory damages are actual damages incurred by the plaintiff-patient, which can include, but is not limited to, lost wages, medical expenses (regardless of whether they are paid for by insurance), impairment of earning capacity, pain and suffering, emotional distress and other related provable damages. Pain and suffering includes compensation for any pain, discomfort, fears, anxiety, and other mental and emotional distress suffered by the patient as a result of the health care provider’s conduct. The purpose of compensatory damages is not to punish a defendant or to reward a plaintiff, but rather to compensate the plaintiff for the injuries he or she has suffered.

Punitive damages, on the other hand, are not awarded to compensate for any injury, but are awarded to punish a party for morally culpable conduct and to deter that party and others from acting in the same way in the future. These damages may only be awarded “where the defendant’s wrongdoing has been intentional and deliberate, and has the character of outrage frequently associated with crime.” [7]

There is general agreement that, because it lacks the element of malice, mere negligence is not enough to establish liability for punitive damages. Thus, medical malpractice alone is not enough to establish liability for punitive damages, since medical malpractice is nothing more than professional negligence in the provision of health care. As one trial court in Vermont found in a medical malpractice/wrongful death action, even if the evidence demonstrates that a patient was “knowingly neglected,” such evidence is insufficient to sustain a claim of punitive damages since “indifference alone cannot sustain a punitive damages claim, even when the consequences of that indifference cause serious personal injury.”[8]

What is joint and several liability?
Joint and several liability refers to the situation in which two or more individuals may be liable for the same harm. For example, if a patient sues three (3) doctors and the jury finds that each doctor was negligent and awards damages, the patient can choose to collect the entire verdict from any one of the three doctors. In Vermont, if the patient collects the entire award from Doctor A, Doctor A cannot seek reimbursement or contribution from Doctors B and/or C.

What is vicarious liability?
Generally, vicarious liability refers to the imposition to liability on one person for the legally actionable conduct of another person based on the relationship between the two persons. A common relationship to which vicarious liability applies is that of employer and employee; employers are legally responsible for the acts of their employees. Thus, if a physician employs a nurse and that nurse commits malpractice, the physician can be found liable for that malpractice based on his or her status as the nurse’s employer.

Are there “caps” on damages in Vermont?
There are no “caps” on compensatory or punitive damages in Vermont.

Sources/Resources
12 V.S.A. § 1908

Brueckner v. Norwich Univ., 169 Vt. 118 (1999)

Crowley v. Fletcher Allen Health Care, No. S1144-00CnC (Vt., Chit. Sup. Ct. Sept. 3, 2002) (Teachout, J.)

What is a statute of limitation?
A statute of limitation sets forth the maximum time period in which a lawsuit may be brought. Once that time period expires, no suit may be filed regardless of the validity of the claims asserted.

What is the statute of limitation on claims of medical malpractice in Vermont?
Generally, actions for medical malpractice must be brought either within three years of the date of the incident or two years from the date of discovery of both the injury and the fact that it may have been caused by the negligence of a health care provider.[9] In any case, a medical malpractice action may not be filed more than seven years from the date of the incident, unless:

Vermont law sets forth a separate statute of limitations for ionizing radiation injuries and injuries from other noxious agents which are medically recognized as having a prolonged latent development.[10] An action to recover for these types of injuries must be commenced within three years after the person suffering the injury knew or ought reasonably to have known that an injury has been suffered, but in no event can the action be commenced more than twenty years after the date of the last occurrence to which the injury is attributed.

What is the statute of limitations on a wrongful death claim?
Actions for wrongful death must be commenced within two years from the discovery of the death of the person.[11]

What is the statute of limitations on a survival action?
A survival action is a cause of action that may be prosecuted even though one of the parties has since died. That cause of action is said to “survive” and may be prosecuted by or against the executors or administrators of the estate of the deceased party. The types of actions that will survive are set forth by statute and include an action for the recovery of damages for bodily hurt or injury, such as medical malpractice.[12] For example, if a patient dies sometime after an injury believed to be caused by malpractice, but before filing a lawsuit, his or her executor or administrator may file a lawsuit within the time period outlined below. Similarly, if a physician dies, a legal action against the physician may be filed or continued after his or her death.

In order for a cause of action to survive, the party must have died within 30 days of the standard statute of limitation period. When this happens, the cause of action must be commenced by or against the executor or administrator of the decedent within two years of the issuance of the “letters testamentary” or “letter of administration” by the Probate Court.

What is the statute of limitation on other types of claims?
In Vermont, except as provided otherwise, civil actions must be commenced within six years after the cause of action “accrues,” that is, after the injured party discovers or reasonably should discover the injury and its cause. This six-year statute of limitations applies to contract actions.

There is a specific statute of limitation for claims of assault and battery, false imprisonment, slander and libel, personal injuries, and damage to personal property. These actions must be brought within three years from the date of accrual of the cause of action.[13] As with the general statute of limitations, a cause of action for these claims accrues when the injured party discovers or reasonably should discover the injury and its cause.

What does it mean when a statute of limitations is tolled?
When a statute of limitations is “tolled,” it means that the time in which a person has to file a suit is temporarily stopped. In Vermont, statutes of limitation are tolled on a variety of grounds, the most common of which are when the person entitled to bring an action is a minor, insane, or imprisoned at the time the cause of action accrues. The statute of limitation will begin to run only after the “disability is removed,” that is, when the minor turns 18, the insane person becomes sane, or the imprisoned person is released from prison.

When may a physician be held liable for failure to obtain informed consent?
In Vermont, a health care practitioner may be held liable for medical malpractice when he or she fails to obtain informed consent for treatment. Lack of informed consent is defined as:

With respect to the first category, the patient asserting a claim of failure to obtain informed consent must produce expert testimony to establish that he or she was not properly informed of the treatment alternatives and the reasonably foreseeable risks and benefits involved therewith, as a reasonable medical professional under similar circumstances would disclose. Without that expert testimony, the plaintiff cannot meet his or her burden of proof.

In assessing whether a physician has obtained informed consent, the focus is on whether the physician advised the patient of the treatment alternatives and reasonably foreseeable risks and benefits which were commonly known to the profession at the time the informed consent discussion did or could have occurred, and at the time the treatment was given. In other words, the scope of the information which should be provided in obtaining informed consent is based on the information commonly known to the profession at that time.

Although there is no specific requirement that informed consent be acknowledged in writing, obtaining such written acknowledgement is common and prudent. In any case, the practitioner should document the content of the discussion and the patient’s consent in the medical record.

Under what circumstances, if any, does a physician not have to obtain informed consent?
Civil liability for medical malpractice based on a lack of informed consent does not apply when the provision of medical care and treatment occurred during an emergency. What constitutes an emergency is not defined in Vermont’s informed consent statute and has not been addressed by the Vermont Supreme Court. In discussing the exceptions to the general duty to obtain informed consent, the Vermont Supreme Court has cited with approval to Trogun v. Fruchtman, 207 N.W.2d 297, 314-15 (Wis. 1973). In that case, the emergency exception applied where the “patient is unconscious or other incapable of consenting and the harm from non-treatment outweighs the harm threatened by the treatment.”

Whether a particular situation constitutes a medical emergency such that the requirement of informed consent does not apply would be measured by an objective medical standard. In an emergency situation in which the patient is unable to provide consent, if the patient’s spouse, significant other or other close family member is available, then the better practice if time permits would be to seek the consent of the family, although doing so is not required by the informed consent statute. In all circumstances, the physician should document in the chart the factors which created the emergency situation and which informed his or her decision to render the treatment provided.

What defenses can be asserted in a malpractice action alleging the failure to obtain informed consent?
The informed consent statute in Vermont sets forth four defenses that may be asserted in a suit alleging failure to obtain informed consent. They are:

A plaintiff cannot establish liability by simply alleging that he or she would not have undergone the treatment received if he or she had been fully informed. Rather, with this defense, the statute creates an objective standard focused on whether a reasonably prudent person would give his or her consent to treatment if he or she had been fully informed. If a reasonably prudent person would have given consent if he or she had been fully informed, then there is no liability for failure to obtain informed consent.

Liability with Respect to Advance Directives
for Health Care
The state of Vermont recognizes the “fundamental right of an adult to determine the extent of health care he or she will receive, including treatment provided during periods of incapacity and at the end of life.”[15] To that end, Vermont allows adults to retain control over their own health care through the use of advance directives.

What is an advance directive?
An advance directive is a written document that may include an appointment of an agent with authority to make health care decisions for a principal, identification of a preferred primary care clinician, instructions on health care desires or treatment goals, an anatomical gift, disposition of remains, and funeral goods and services.

In Vermont, a health care provider, health care facility, and residential care facility shall not provide health care to a patient without capacity, except on an emergency basis, without first attempting to determine whether the patient has an advance directive in effect.[16]

For specific information regarding advance directives, see the section on End of Life Issues.

Is a health care professional who complies with the terms of an advance directive exposed to any civil or criminal liability for doing so?
No. Health care professionals, health care facilities, residential care facilities, and their agents are immune from civil and criminal liability when they:

However, these professionals are not immune from liability for the failure to follow the standards of professional conduct and to exercise due care in the provision of services. Additionally, no employee of the previously listed professionals can be subjected to an adverse employment decision for either complying with an advance directive or for providing notice to his or her employer that he or she will be unable to comply with an instruction in an advance directive due to a moral conflict. In the latter case, the practitioner must still provide ongoing health care to the patient until a new practitioner has been found to provide services.

When may a health care provider be exposed to civil or criminal liability?
Health care providers, health care facilities, residential care facilities, and their agents having actual knowledge of an advance directive or an instruction of the principal, agent or guardian, are subject to review and disciplinary action by the appropriate licensing entity, and/or civil or criminal liability for failing to comply with the terms of a known advance directive or failing to follow the instructions of a duly appointed agent or guardian who has the authority to make health care decisions for a principal.

However, there are circumstances when these professionals may properly refuse to comply with the terms of an advance directive or the instructions of a duly appointed agent or guardian (see section on End of Life Issues). In those circumstances, the professional must still comply with the procedures set forth in 18 V.S.A. § 9707(b) in order to be protected from civil and/or criminal liability or disciplinary action.

What is the Duty to Aid the Endangered Act?
The purpose of the Duty to Aid the Endangered Act is to encourage rescuers to assist others in danger by penalizing them for not acting while at the same time shielding them from civil liability for acts of ordinary negligence committed during the rescue.[17]

The Vermont Legislature enacted this statute largely due to its concern that medical personnel were reluctant to help those in need for fear of malpractice suits. The statute imposes an affirmative duty on everyone, including health care professionals, to provide reasonable assistance to individuals who are known to be exposed to “grave physical harm.” Grave physical harm is not limited to a single, traumatic event such as a car accident, but rather encompasses all situations in which a rescuer knows that someone is exposed to serious harm.

A person who provides reasonable assistance to an individual exposed to grave physical harm shall not be held liable for civil damages arising out of his or her conduct unless his or her acts constitute gross negligence, or he or she will receive or expects to receive remuneration for his or her services. Gross negligence is “more than an error of judgment, momentary inattention, or loss of presence of mind, rather, it amounts to a failure to exercise even a slight degree of care and an indifference to the duty owed to another.”[18]

With respect to the receipt of remuneration, the mere fact that a rescuer is paid a regular salary during the time period in which he or she comes to the assistance of an individual does not remove the immunity created by the statute. Rather, it is when the rescuer charges the victim for the services rendered that the statutory immunity becomes inapplicable. Nothing in this statute alters the liability of a health care provider for acts committed in the ordinary course of his or her practice.

Does Vermont law require screening or arbitration of medical malpractice claims prior to the commencement of a lawsuit?
No. In 1991, Vermont adopted a system for mandatory arbitration of medical malpractice claims, however, implementation of that system was tied to the enactment of a “universal access health care system” by the General Assembly. To date, that has not happened. Instead, the Legislature enacted a procedure for voluntarily submitting medical malpractice claims to arbitration,[19] which has seldom been used. Both the physician and patient must agree to submit a claim to arbitration after discovery of the alleged injury and prior to the commencement of any trial on that claim.

The arbitration panel consists of a judicial referee selected by the court administrator, and a layperson and member of the same profession as the respondent-doctor, both chosen by lot. In addition to challenges for cause, the parties have the right to one preemptory challenge with respect to the judicial referee and three such challenges with respect to the lay and professional panel members. The law sets forth the specific procedures to be followed in the arbitration process. Claims are to be submitted to the arbitration panel in an “informal matter;” strict adherence to the technical rules of procedure and evidence, as in a civil litigation, is not required. Discovery is allowed and the parties have the right to present testimony and cross-examine witnesses. Notably, unlike in medical malpractice claims filed in Superior Court, no expert testimony is required during arbitration. The decision of the arbitration panel may be appealed directly to the Vermont Supreme Court.

Does Vermont law require participation in alternative dispute resolution after a medical malpractice lawsuit is commenced?
Generally, yes. Parties to most civil actions filed in Vermont, whether in state or federal court, are required to participate in alternative dispute resolution prior to going to trial.

National Practitioner Data Bank

What is the National Practitioner Data Bank?
The National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB) collects information on medical malpractice payments; adverse licensure, clinical privilege, professional society actions, and practitioners who have been declared ineligible to participate in Medicare or Medicaid under the Social Security Act. The NPDB’s home page, www.npdb-hipdb.com, has many resources for health care practitioners regarding the data bank, including guidebooks and fact sheets on various topics.

What information must be reported to the National Practitioner Data Bank and by whom?
Information which must be reported to the Data Bank falls into five categories:

1. Medical Malpractice Payments
Medical malpractice payments are limited to payments of money made as a result of a written complaint or claim, including filing suit, demanding monetary payment for damages arising out of a health care practitioner's “provision of or failure to provide health care services.” They include payments made as a result of an adverse verdict as well as payments made to settle a claim. The payment must be reported to the NPDB and the appropriate state licensing board by whoever makes the payment (e.g., an insurance company) within 30 days of the date payment is made.

Payments made as a result of a suit or claim asserted solely against an entity (such as a hospital, clinic, or practice group), and not against an identified individual practitioner, are not reportable. Additionally, payments made by individual practitioners for their own benefit do not need to be reported to the NPDB.

2. Adverse Licensure Actions
State medical and dental boards must report certain disciplinary actions related to professional competence or conduct taken against the licenses of physicians or dentists within 30 days of the date it takes action against a health care practitioner's license.

3. Adverse Clinical Privileges Actions
A health care entity (hospital or professional review committee) must report to the NPDB and the appropriate state licensing board any professional review action based on professional competence or conduct that adversely affects the clinical privileges of a physician or dentist for longer than 30 days, within 15 days from the date adverse action was taken. Health care entities must also report the voluntary surrender or restriction of clinical privileges which under, or to avoid, investigation within 15 days of the surrender or restriction of privileges. Health care entities may report on other health care practitioners.

4. Adverse Professional Membership Actions
Professional societies must report to the NPDB and the appropriate state licensing board any professional review action based on professional competence or conduct that adversely affects a physician or dentist’s membership within 15 days from the date adverse action was taken. Professional societies may report on other health care practitioners.

5. Exclusions from Medicare/Medicaid
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is responsible for notifying the NPDB of the identity of practitioners who have been declared ineligible to participate in Medicare or Medicaid or who have been reinstated to participate. Such reports are made on a monthly basis. CMS retains full responsibility for the content and accuracy of Medicare/Medicaid Exclusion Reports; the NPDB acts only as a disclosure service.

There are a variety of sanctions, including civil money penalties, which may be imposed on mandatory reporters who fail to report required information to the NPDB.

Are health care practitioners notified when reports concerning them are made to the NPDB?
Yes. A “Notification of a Report in the Data Bank(s)” is mailed to the subject of the report by the NPDB.

What recourse do health care practitioners have when they dispute some or all of the information contained in a report to the NPDB?
The NPDB is prohibited by law from modifying the information in the reports. If the information in a report is inaccurate, the subject of that report has three options. First, he or she can add a statement (“Subject Statement”) to a report at any time. The statement will be appended to the report and sent with the report when queries are made. There are specific requirements that must be complied with when submitting a Subject Statement; they can be found on the NPDB’s home page, www.hpdb-hipdb.com.

Second, the subject of the report can contact the reporting entity to request that it voluntarily correct the information by filing a correction to the report.

Third, the subject can initiate a dispute online through the Report Response Service. If the reporting entity refuses to change the report upon notification of the dispute, then the subject can request that the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services review the disputed report. This can eventually be escalated to the point where a lawsuit may be filed against the secretary.[20] The NPDB home page, www.npdb-hipdb.com, explains the specific procedures which must be followed in filing an online dispute, as well as the limitations on the information in a report that can be challenged via this process.

Who can access the information maintained by the NPDB?
Information in the NPDB may, and in some cases shall, be requested by:

1. Hospitals
Hospitals are the only health care entities with mandatory requirements for querying the NPDB. Specifically, they must query the NPDB:

2. Physicians, dentists and other (licensed) health care practitioners when seeking information about himself or herself.

All health care practitioners can self-query the NPDB regarding himself or herself at any time. This can be done by going to www.npdb-hipdb.com and clicking on the “Perform a Self-Query” icon on the right side of the home page.

4. Attorneys who have filed a malpractice action against a hospital and a health care practitioner, if there is evidence (not obtained from the NPDB) that the hospital failed to request information from the NPDB on the practitioner named in the malpractice action

There are specific requirements which must be met in order for plaintiffs’ attorneys to request this information. Once received, the information can be used only in connection with a legal action or claim against a hospital, not against the health care practitioner. Defense attorneys are not allowed to query the NPDB simply because the defendant practitioner is allowed to self-query.

5. Health care entities that provide health care services and follow a formal peer review process for the purpose of furthering health care

Health care entities, other than hospitals, may query when screening applicants for medical staff appointment or granting clinical privileges, and in support of professional review activity.

6. Professional societies that follow a formal peer review process for the purpose of furthering health care

Professional societies may query the NPDB when screening an applicant for membership or affiliation, and in support of professional review activity.

What is the safe apology law?
The so-called safe apology law is a statute enacted by the Vermont Legislature on May 15, 2006, which provides that an oral expression of regret or apology, including any oral good faith explanation of how a medical error occurred, made by or on behalf of a health care provider or health care facility:

The person making the apology may not be questioned at deposition or otherwise with respect to the apology. The apology must be made within 30 days of when the provider or facility knew or should have known of the consequences of the error in order to come within the protections of this law. Additionally, the statute only applies to medical errors that occurred on or after July 1, 2006.

What is the Sorry Works! pilot program?
Sorry Works! is a voluntary pilot program created by the Vermont Legislature on May 15, 2006, which requires participating hospitals and physicians to promptly acknowledge and apologize for mistakes in patient care that result in harm and promptly offer fair settlements. If the parties reach a settlement, no further litigation with respect to the mistake will be allowed. If the settlement negotiations are unsuccessful, then participation in the program will toll the statute of limitations for the time the parties were engaged in such negotiations. Communications between the parties engaged in negotiation pursuant to this program are privileged and are not discoverable or admissible in any civil or administrative proceeding.

What is the Patient Safety Surveillance and Improvement System?
The Patient Safety Surveillance and Improvement System (PSSIS) was created by the Vermont Legislature on May 31, 2006, for the purpose of improving patient safety, eliminating adverse events in Vermont hospitals, and supporting and facilitating quality improvement efforts by hospitals. Under the PSSIS, hospitals are required, among other things, to:

All of the information provided to the Department of Health as part of the PSSIS is confidential and privileged, exempt from the public access to records law, and in any civil or administrative proceeding, immune from subpoena, not subject to discovery and is not admissible into evidence. Additionally, hospitals are permitted to replace health care provider identifying information in peer review materials with a surrogate identifier that allows for tracking of adverse events involving the same provider without disclosing the provider’s identity.

Hospitals that fail to comply with any of the requirements of the PSSIS are subject to monetary penalties.

Return to Guide Home Page

About the Authors

Ritchie E. Berger is an attorney with Dinse, Knapp, & McAndrew, P.C., in Burlington, Vt., and has more than 20 years of experience in complex litigation and health care law. He enjoys a statewide reputation as one of Vermont's premier trial lawyers. Mr. Berger represents hospitals, physicians, and other health care professionals throughout Vermont in all state and federal courts and before administrative boards. He is a fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates, of which he is past-president of the Vermont Chapter, and he is listed in The Best Lawyers in America and in Chambers USA, America's Leading Lawyers for Business. He regularly lectures and conducts seminars before legal and health care organizations, and is co-author of Vermont Jury Instructions, published in 1993 by Butterworth Legal Publishers.

Angela R. Clark is an attorney with Dinse, Knapp, & McAndrew, P.C., in Burlington, Vermont where she practices exclusively in litigation, with an emphasis on professional malpractice. She has served as a clerk to the Rutland County trial courts in Rutland, Vermont as well as to the Cumberland and Kennebec County Superior courts in Maine. A graduate of Trinity College of Vermont and Vermont Law School, Ms. Clark is a member of the American and Vermont Bar Associations.

Jon Jeffrey Tyzbir is an attorney with Dinse, Knapp, & McAndrew, P.C., in Burlington, Vt., where he practices civil litigation with emphases on professional malpractice and commercial litigation. He is a graduate of the University of Vermont, University of Richmond School of Law (JD), and the Georgetown University Law Center (LLM). He is a member of the American, Vermont, and New York Bar Associations and the American Society of International Law.

Footnotes

[1] 12 V.S.A. § 1908
[2] Utzler v. Medical Center Hospital, 149 Vt. 126, 127 (1987)
[3] Rooney v. Medical Center Hosp. of Vermont, Inc., 162 Vt. 513, 521 (1994)
[4] Lockwood v. Lord, 163 Vt. 210, 217 (1994)
[5] Senesac v. Associates in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 141 Vt. 310 (1982). See also Utzler v. Medical Center Hosp., 149 Vt. 126 (1987)
[6] Largess v. Tatem, 130 Vt. 271 (1972)
[7] Brueckner v. Norwich Univ., 169 Vt. 118, 129 (1999)
[8] Crowley v. Fletcher Allen Health Care, No. S1144-00CnC (Vt., Chit. Sup. Ct. Sept. 3, 2002) (Teachout, J.).
[9] 12 V.S.A. § 521
[10] 12 V.S.A. § 518
[11] 14 V.S.A. § 1492(a)
[12] 14 V.S.A. § 1451-1453
[13] 12 V.S.A. § 512
[14] 12 V.S.A. § 1909(a)
[15] 18 V.S.A. § 9700
[16] 18 V.S.A. § 9707(a)
[17] Hardingham v. United Counseling Serv., 164 Vt. 478, 483 (1995)
[18] Hardingham, 164 Vt. at 482 (quotations omitted)
[19] 12 V.S.A. §§ 7001-7009
[20] Doe v. Thompson, 332 F.Supp.2d 124 (D.M.D. 2004).

Sources/Resources
12 V.S.A. § 1908

Brueckner v. Norwich Univ., 169 Vt. 118 (1999)

fraudulent concealment has prevented the patient’s discovery of the medical malpractice; or

the action is based upon the discovery of a foreign object in the patient’s body, in which case, the action may be commenced within two years of the date of the discovery of the foreign object.

National Practitioner Data Bank

Return to Guide Home Page

About the Authors

Sources/Resources 12 V.S.A. § 1908 Brueckner v. Norwich Univ., 169 Vt. 118 (1999)

fraudulent concealment has prevented the patient’s discovery of the medical malpractice; or

the action is based upon the discovery of a foreign object in the patient’s body, in which case, the action may be commenced within two years of the date of the discovery of the foreign object.

National Practitioner Data Bank

Return to Guide Home Page

About the Authors

Sources/Resources
12 V.S.A. § 1908

Brueckner v. Norwich Univ., 169 Vt. 118 (1999)