Medical Malpractice Component

timer Asked: Sep 9th, 2017
account_balance_wallet $15

Question Description

I. Introduction: A. Summarize the case, including information on the stakeholders involved, the problem, and the time period the incident occurred.

II. Medical Malpractice Component: In this section, you will evaluate the case to address the legal components, the malpractice policies similar to this case, and the standard of care given to the patient and how it was breached. Then, you will draw connections to how this malpractice case impacted stakeholders and healthcare consumers outside of the case.

A. Explain the key legal components of the case, including the nature of the issue and the rules that applied.

B. Determine relevant malpractice policies in place for addressing the issues within the case.

C. Analyze the malpractice case for the standard of care provided to the victim. Be sure to apply what the law states about standard of care to support whether or not it was breached in the case

. D. Analyze how the malpractice case would impact healthcare consumers from different cultural backgrounds. For example, would this case have a similar impact on a person from a culture different from the one in the case? How could this incident change the views of these healthcare consumers toward the healthcare system? E. Assess the malpractice case for accountability based on its severity. To what extent was the healthcare provider held accountable?

This is the case Iturralde v. Hilo Medical Center

Tutor Answer

School: Carnegie Mellon University



Iturralde V. Hilo Medical Center
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation


Iturralde V. Hilo Medical Center
Notably, the case involves four major parties, that is, Rosalinda Iturralde, Hilo Medical
Center (HMC), Medtronic Sofamor Danek, and Dr. Robert Ricketson. In this case, Rosalinda is
the personal representative of Arturo Iturralde’s estate, a Plaintiff-Appellant and a CrossAppellee. HMC is a state-owned medical institution based in the State of Hawai‘i, where Arturo
Iturralde underwent surgery that resulted in deterioration in his health conditions and eventually
death. In this case, HMC as a corporation is Defendant-Appellee and a Cross-Appellant.
Medtronic Sofamor Danek is a USA based business licensed to perform business operations in
Hawai‘i. On January 27, 2001, Medtronic supplied the essential kit that was required to perform
surgery on Arturo as requested by HMC. Dr. Robert Ricketson a doctor working at HMC
performed a surgery on Arturo on January 29, 2001. In this case, Medtronic and Ricketson are
Defendant-Appellees. Initially, Rosalinda filed a case against HMC in the Circuit Court
regarding medical malpractices by HMC and Ricketson that led to Arturo’s death about two
years after the surgery. However, the court rulings were unsatisfactory to both Rosalinda and
HMC, which forces both parties to appeal the court rulings in October 2007.
Medical Malpra...

flag Report DMCA

Goes above and beyond expectations !

Similar Questions
Hot Questions
Related Tags
Study Guides

Brown University

1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology

2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University

982 Tutors

Columbia University

1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University

2113 Tutors

Emory University

2279 Tutors

Harvard University

599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

2319 Tutors

New York University

1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University

1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University

2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University

932 Tutors

Princeton University

1211 Tutors

Stanford University

983 Tutors

University of California

1282 Tutors

Oxford University

123 Tutors

Yale University

2325 Tutors