Physicians and Surgeons—Malpractice—Court Disregard for the Standard of the Profession—The Legislative Response—Helling v. Carey, 83 Wn. 2d 514, 519 P.2d 981 (1974); Wash. Rev. Code § 4.24.290 (Supp. 1975)

This note will examine the relationship between the standard of care and the role of expert medical testimony in medical malpractice actions, discuss various interpretations of the Helling decision, and suggest the most practical of those interpretations, particularly in light of the subsequent enactment of R.C.W. § 4.24.290.5 The purpose of this statute was to nullify the Helling decision and re-establish the pre-Helling standards of negligence in medical malpractice cases. As will be demonstrated, although the statute in large part succeeds in allaying the fears of medical practitioners and defense attorneys which were induced by Helling v. Carey, the case retains significance in its potential for expanding lay participation in determining the applicable standard of care in medical malpractice cases

National parts return program. Volume I. Summary report. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Office of Defects Investigation, Washington, D.C.Mode of access: Internet.Author corporate affiliation: Kappa Systems, Inc., Arlington, Va.Report covers the period 1 July 1975-30 June 1976Subject code: DFSubject code: DZN*NOOSubject code: I

Vehicle selection matrix. Final report.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, Washington, D.C.Mode of access: Internet.Author corporate affiliation: Kappa Systems, Inc., Arlington, Va.Report covers the period 20 May 1977-1 March 1978. Contract amount - $28,066Subject code: DECMSubject code: RCGE*DESubject code: RCGFSubject code: XL