An Indiana hospital prevailed over a doctor who claimed that it unlawfully retaliated against him for objecting to a course of treatment that allegedly would have violated a federal emergency medical care law.
William Partin pleaded “himself out of court” by framing his claim as one based on a refusal to engage in conduct that might have led to a prohibited transfer of an emergency patient because such conduct isn’t protected by the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, the US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana said.
EMTALA’s whistleblower provision protects refusals to transfer and reporting statutory ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.