ERISA: U.S. Supreme Court Holds Treatment Decisions Made by HMO Physician-Employees Do Not Breach Fiduciary Duty

Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 28 (3):309-318 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

ERISA: No Preemption of State's HMO Law Requiring Independent Physician Review.Tal Sapeika - 2000 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 28 (4):407-408.
The patient's duty to adhere to prescribed treatment: An ethical analysis.David B. Resnik - 2005 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (2):167 – 188.
Fiduciary Obligation in Clinical Research.Paul B. Miller & Charles Weijer - 2006 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 34 (2):424-440.
ERISA and RICO: New Tools for HMO Litigators.Elaine T. Moore - 2000 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 28 (1):83-88.
Informed consent: Patient's right or patient's duty?Richard T. Hull - 1985 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 10 (2):183-198.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-08-31

Downloads
22 (#688,104)

6 months
8 (#352,434)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references