Resident was sexually assaulted in a mental health facility. Plaintiff brought an action alleging negligent hiring, gross negligence, sexual assault, sexual exploitation, and premises liability. No expert report was filed. Defendants argued the claims sounded in malpractice and moved to dismiss based on failure to file an expert report. Because the duty to protect the resident was premised on her vulnerability as a resident in the facility and the facility’s duty to protect her, the court concluded that the claim was a health care liability claim and reversed the trial court’s denial of the motion to dismiss. Decided July 27, 2006.
Elder law attorneys sometimes find themselves in various types of litigation ranging from guardianship cases,…
Today the Social Security Administration announced the Cost of Living Adjustment for next year, posting…
Years ago I had the pleasure of knowing Arvin Reingold, a Chattanooga lawyer. He was…
When you're looking at investing, there is no substitute for qualified competent advice. Having said…
My thoughts on investing may or may not help you. I don't claim to be…
Compensation of the Conservator is generally addressed at O.C.G.A. § 29-5-50. There, the Code provides:…