Welcome to the second edition of the Roberts, Carroll, Feldstein and Peirce Quarterly Newsletter.

Questions, comments, suggestions and/or feedback concerning any of the items covered in this newsletter, or any other matter, are always welcome. If you have an idea, issue or topic you would like us to address, please email us at rcfpevents@rcfp.com.

Sincerely,

Roberts Carroll Feldstein and Peirce

Quarterly Newsletter: September 2012

Key Provisions In The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Based on the United States Supreme Court’s decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, the arrival of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is imminent. The Healthcare Group at RCFP has analyzed the act from multiple perspectives. The 1024 page act introduces many changes, some of which are summarized here.

Changes to Medical Records Affidavit Statute Will Not Affect Medical Malpractice Cases

In 2012 the Rhode Island General Assembly considered legislation which would have enacted drastic changes to the present law regarding the use of medical records affidavits at trial. Specifically, the proposed legislation would have allowed affidavits signed by non-medical professionals to be introduced as evidence at trial regarding the necessity of medical treatment and the causation of the plaintiff’s alleged injuries. Through effective lobbying efforts, these changes were not implemented for professional negligence cases, such as medical malpractice cases.

New EEOC Enforcement Guidance on Criminal Background Checks

The EEOC’s Enforcement Guidance on criminal background checks is intended to discourage blanket exclusions of job applicants who have been convicted of crimes. Preferring individualized assessments, the EEOC suggests that an applicant be given an opportunity to demonstrate that his/her exclusion based on a criminal conviction is not appropriate because the conviction is not job related.

E-Discovery: Who Bears The Costs? (Part I)

As the need for the discovery of electronically stored information increases, and with it the cost of discovery, it is important to determine who bears the cost of producing the relevant information. While courts have developed a mechanism to split the costs of electronic discovery between the parties to the action, the development of cloud computing may complicate matters.