SurlyBonds wrote:Medical malpractice is, of course, a private right of action, and it also requires an injury for which a plaintiff can seek damages. Who's being injured here?
No; medical malpractice can be an Administrative Law issue; wherein the State has the right to revoke a medical license after an administrative hearing. The State(s), following any complaints about a medical practicioner's actions, have a right (and usually a responsibility) to pursue a hearing as to whether he or she is guilty of malpractice.
Medical malpractice can also be, but is not necessarily, a tort action.
SurlyBonds wrote:As to "unfair trade practices," care to state the statute they're violating?.
The Deceptive Trade Practices Acts in most states, which includes a provision for action should a person do, or claim to be eligible to do, an act that he or she is not eligible to do legally. Coupled with the requirement that a doctor obtain and respond to the medical conditions he or she personally sees or discovers, or which another competent referring physician sees or discovers and relates to him or her, I would argue that providing medical documentation without a competent examination of the patient would be an act that would be, or in the proper course of business should be, outside his or her legal activities.
Such actions can be brought by either the State or any aggrieved party which, in this case, might even be an airline that had been defrauded into allowing a passenger to carry an animal onboard under false pretenses.