There are two types of objectives for the Lab’s Comparative Medical Accident Liability (“Comp-MAL”) Project:
- First, to comparatively investigate the rule systems and evidence assessment patterns in medical malpractice cases in the United States and Italy;
- Second, to develop protocols for using the default-logic framework to investigate legal decisions in two different legal systems involving two different natural languages.
Read Post
The methodology for the Lab’s Comparative Medical Accident Liability (“Comp-MAL”) Project begins with identifying a sample of cases in the United States and Italy that is representative and instructive on several levels.
- First, the fact patterns selected should represent the major areas of medical conduct that give rise to malpractice law suits.
- Second, the decisions selected should involve the major types of legal issues that arise in medical malpractice cases.
- Third, the decisions selected should be sufficiently complex on the evidence, in order to comparatively investigate evidence assessment, and not merely rule systems.
Read Post
These are the assigned decisions for the course in Comparative Health Care Liability, part of the study abroad program in Pisa, Italy in 2010 co-sponsored by Hofstra Law School and the Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna. The program as a whole incorporates both methods and materials developed at the LLT Lab.
Read Post
