Chapter 3.C.4. (or 2.B.4) Fiduciary Principles, Conflicts of Interest, and Novel Disclosure Obligations
Note 4. Financial Disclosure Claims in the Courts.
For a recent effort to use fiduciary theories in the context of obesity drug litigation, see Wright v. Jeckle, 90 P.3d 65 (Wash. App. Div. 3 2004).
Note 5. Other Financial Conflicts.
For an article that examines financial conflict of interest between physicians and medical device companies see Reed Abelson, Hospitals See Possible Conflict on Medical Devices for Doctors, N.Y. Times, Sept. 22, 2006 at A1.
Note 6. Nonfinancial Provider-Associated Risks.
When a patient consents to surgery by one doctor and another doctor performs the surgery, there is no cause of action for battery, lack of informed consent, breach of contract, or breach of fiduciary duty without a showing of proximate cause. Starozytnyk v. Reich, 377 N.J.Super. 111, 871 A.2d. 733 (2005).
Note 6 (a) Experience and Success Rates.
See also, Heyward H. Bouknight, III, Note, Between the Scalpel and the Lie: Comparing Theories of Physician Accountability for Misrepresentations of Experience and Competence, 60 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 1515 (2003); Robert Weinstein et al., Infection-Control Report Cards – Ensuring Patient Safety, 353 New Eng. J. Med. 225 (2005); Milt Freudenheim, To Find a Doctor, Mine the Data, N.Y. Times, Sept. 22, 2005, at C1; and DeGennaro v. Tandon, 89 Conn. App. 183 (2005) cert. denied, 879 A.2d 191 (Conn. 2005) (reasonable patient would consider lack of experience in using equipment, and lack of assistance, to be material information about provider-specific risk).