Warning

Info

Table of Contents
🤖LSDBot🤖, HLS '23 |

0 0

Back to briefs

Johnson v. St. Vincent Hospital, Inc.

(1980)

Supreme Court of Indiana - 404 N.E.2d 585

tl;dr:

The Indiana Medical Malpractice Act is being challenged in multiple cases for potentially violating the constitution.

Video Summary

ICRAIssue, Conclusion, Rule, Analysis for Johnson v. St. Vincent Hospital, Inc.

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Johnson v. St. Vincent Hospital, Inc. case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

Facts & HoldingJohnson v. St. Vincent Hospital, Inc. case brief facts & holding

Facts:The Indiana Medical Malpractice Act requires a medical review panel...

Holding:The court's final holding is that the Indiana Medical Malpractice...

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Johnson v. St. Vincent Hospital, Inc. case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition

Font size -+
Johnson v. St. Vincent Hospital, Inc. | Case Brief DeepDive
Majority opinion, author: DeBRULER, Justice.
Level 1
Click below 👇 to DeepDive

The Indiana Medical Malpractice Act is being challenged for violating constitutional provisions. The Act requires a medical review panel before filing a lawsuit, which is being contested. The admissibility of the panel's opinion at trial, limitations on recovery, attorney fees, time to bring a malpractice action, and prohibition on plaintiffs asking for a specific amount in the prayer are also being challenged. The Act was enacted to protect the public health and wellbeing of the community by preserving the availability of professional services of physicians and other healthcare providers. The court upholds the constitutionality of the medical review panel requirement, the $500,000 limitation on recovery, and the limitation on attorney fees. However, the court notes that it is arbitrary to select injured patients to bear the burden of the recovery limitation being considered. The constitutionality of the provision in the Indiana Medical Malpractice Act that establishes a patient's compensation fund is being challenged. The right to trial by jury guaranteed by Art. I, § 20, of the Indiana Constitution is also being contested. The burden of proving the unconstitutionality of the Act falls on the party challenging it, and a statute will only be declared unconstitutional if its fatal constitutional defects are clearly apparent.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Johnson v. St. Vincent Hospital, Inc. case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

🤯 High points 🤯Key points contributed by students on LSD

LSD+ exclusive

This content is exclusively for LSD+ users.

Sign up for LSD+ for full access to the Johnson v. St. Vincent Hospital, Inc. case brief summary.

Enjoy unlimited access with our 14-day free trial.

LSD+ Case Briefs

Features

  • DeepDive for detailed case analysis
  • Over 50,000 existing case briefs
  • Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
  • Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
  • Social learning with chat and high points

Over 50,000 Cases Briefed

LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.

14-Day Free Trial

Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.

Integrated Legal Dictionary

Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.

Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.

DeepDive

DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.

Brief anything. Instantly.

Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.

Social Learning with Chat and High Points

Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.

Real-Time Brief Feedback

Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.

Johnson v. St. Vincent Hospital, Inc.

Chat for Johnson v. St. Vincent Hospital, Inc.
brief-12481
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.