Arizona’s Medical Malpractice Act Is Not Unconstitutional

dc.creatorSherman, Larry
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-26T19:21:21Z
dc.date.available2019-09-26T19:21:21Z
dc.date.issued1978
dc.description.abstractDiscusses the Arizona Supreme Court’s case Eastin v. Broomfield. The court in Eastin upheld as constitutional Arizona’s Medical Malpractice Act, which required in part that a plaintiff go first before a medical liability review panel before being allowed to proceed to trial. The author believes this issue will not be settled until it is reviewed by the United States Supreme Court.en_US
dc.identifier.citation9 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 679en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2346/85116
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherTexas Tech Law Reviewen_US
dc.subjectMedical malpracticeen_US
dc.subjectConstitutionalityen_US
dc.subjectReview panelen_US
dc.subjectMedical Malpractice Acten_US
dc.subjectReasonable careen_US
dc.subjectEastin v. Broomfielden_US
dc.subjectCase noteen_US
dc.titleArizona’s Medical Malpractice Act Is Not Unconstitutionalen_US
dc.title.alternativePhysicians and Surgeons—Medical Malpractice—Arizona’s Medical Malpractice Act Is Not Unconstitutionalen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
45_9TE~1.PDF
Size:
1.4 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.57 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: