Fred James was found unconscious in an alley. He was taken to the
emergency room of the Malabar County Clinic. He was treated there and
released. When he was later billed for the treatment, he refused to pay.
Will James have to pay anything to Malabar?
2007-10-20 06:52:21 · 16 answers · asked by broadrippian 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
What are the elements of a contract?
How do the elements of a contract apply to this case?
2007-10-20 07:47:25 · update #1
would contract law apply?
2007-10-20 07:48:16 · update #2
The Good Samaritan Law states that when someone is incompacitated you have to assume that if that person was conscious that they would, in fact, want to be helped and treated. So yes, he is liable for the bill.
2007-10-20 06:56:17 · answer #1 · answered by pennylanegal 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The issue raised here is consent. Informed consent is a legal and ethical precondition for medical treatment with the exception of emergency situations. No patient may be treated unless consent to treatment has been given. However, it is reasonable for the hospital to assume that the state of unconsciousness is an "emergency" and therefore James consented. Having consented, the hospital may then bill him for their services.
Of course the question must surely be raised by James, "Would I have consented to all the treatment provided by the Hospital if I had been conscious?" In this question, James may find some strength for his argument that he should not have to pay for services rendered by the Hospital.
In short - I would opine that James would be indebted to Malabar.
2007-10-20 14:03:39 · answer #2 · answered by VI Guy 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely he is legally obligated for the services rendered to him by the clinic. His obvious reasoning is that he didn't give his permission to be treated therefore it wasn't his responsibility.
Reality check....somebody who finds someone who is unconscious is under an ethical if not legal obligation to see that first aid is rendered. If the fact that the person who makes a call for aid is deemed to be financially responsible (this would include police officers) then I'm afraid very few calls would be made and we would have a lot more people dead on arrival.
2007-10-20 13:58:23 · answer #3 · answered by malter 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's a restitution claim -- based on the doctrine of unjust enrichment -- and the standard answer in the US is that James would have to pay the fair value of the medical treatment he received
2007-10-20 14:00:52 · answer #4 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes he will because he did recievemedical attention from the hospital bottom line so he will have to pay his bill or risked being sent to court
2007-10-20 14:04:09 · answer #5 · answered by Brandon p 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes because it will be taken to court and the judge will fall in favor of the clinic and he will be forced to pay the fine
2007-10-20 13:55:38 · answer #6 · answered by devin b 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
he obviously wuld hav 2 pay 4 it......its his life his treatment if he wasnt treatd he wuld hav lost on his life n evrything........but on the other side it may hav bn an atempt 2 suicide n in that case it wuld b prison so beter pay the bill!!!
2007-10-20 13:57:01 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would say he has a legal obligation to pay, but the reality is that he probably cannot be forced to do so.
2007-10-20 13:55:20 · answer #8 · answered by mommanuke 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Depends why he was unconscious. If it was an accident, then no, he shouldn't have to pay. But if it was due to drugs/alcohol, then yes, he should have to pay for his own faults and mistakes.
2007-10-20 13:55:58 · answer #9 · answered by Ryan14 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, he was given treatment.
2007-10-20 13:57:16 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋