查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- The Current Trend of Allocating the Burden of Proof through Medical Malpractice Civil Action in the United States
- 淺談醫療過失訴訟之舉證責任分配
- 論損害賠償程序中關於損害額確定之舉證責任減輕--我國民事訴訟法第二百二十二條第二項之發展評估
- 舉證責任倒置於醫療過失之適用--八十九年度重訴字第四七二號判決評釋
- 舉證責任與證據契約之基本問題--以作業系統裝置契約之給付不完全為例
- 民事舉證責任分配法條之修正及其實用
- 民事訴訟法講座系列(9)--不當得利中無法律上原因要件之舉證責任分配
- 危險責任之生成與界限:舉證責任與過度防制
- 論我國民事訴訟法關於當事人舉證責任的規定
- 再論--不當得利無法律上原因要件之舉證責任分配
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | The Current Trend of Allocating the Burden of Proof through Medical Malpractice Civil Action in the United States=美國醫療糾紛民事舉證責任的現況趨勢 |
---|---|
作者 | 程法彰; Cheng, Fa-chang; |
期刊 | 輔仁醫學期刊 |
出版日期 | 20101200 |
卷期 | 8:4 2010.12[民99.12] |
頁次 | 頁191-198 |
分類號 | 419.49 |
語文 | eng |
關鍵詞 | 醫療過失; 舉證責任; 美國舉證責任分配; 事實即為證明原則; 案件初始舉證責任; 民事訴訟; Medical malpractice; Burden of proof; Allocating the burden of proof in the US; The res ipsa loquitur principle; Prima facie case requirement; Civil litigation; |
中文摘要 | 在醫療糾紛的案件中,事實認定的爭議部份則由陪審團或法官(在無陪審團之情況下)在案件審理中,藉由雙方舉證責任分配的過程依雙方所提出的證據加以決定。因此在原告滿足其案件繫屬的初始舉證責任後,雙方舉證責任的分配便依法規範加以實踐。在一般民事訴訟的案件中,原告負有舉證的責任,但是在醫療糾紛民事案件舉證的標準上,可能出現訴訟過程中舉證責任倒置的情況,而本文的重點即在探討美國在醫療糾紛民事案件中的舉證責任分配。因此本文首先擬就美國一般民事案件訴訟過程中的舉證責任原則加以簡要說明,其次針對美國對於醫療過失案件訴訟過程中所採取舉證責任倒置(resipsa loquitur)的想法與內容加以說明,最後再以最近美國的相關案例說明,藉此對於美國目前關於醫療過失民事案件訴訟過程中舉證責任倒置的趨勢現況提出個人的觀察與建議。 |
英文摘要 | In medical malpractice cases, factual issues are decided by a fact finder (either a jury or trial judge) through evidence provided by both parties in the process of deciding the burden of proof. After the plaintiff satisfies the prima facie case requirements, allocation of the burden of proof in a trial follows according to the rule of law. In ordinary situations, a plaintiff has the ultimate burden of persuasion in a trial, but with trials of medical malpractice, sometimes the rules for allocating the burden of proof differ under some circumstances. The issue of allocating the burden of proof in trials of medical malpractice cases is the focus of this article. Based upon the introductory material and for the purpose of this article, in the beginning, this paper provides a brief explanation of the general principle of allocation of the burden of proof in a trial of civil litigation in the US. Then, the idea and substantial content of the res ipsa loquitur principle related to trials of medical malpractice for allocation of the burden of proof in the US are introduced. In the last part of this article, a fairly recent case related to the res ipsa loquitur principle is discussed, and personal observations of future trends in dealing with the issue of allocating the burden of proof in medical malpractice litigation are made. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。