[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
July 1, 1905


JAMA. 1905;XLV(1):48. doi:10.1001/jama.1905.02510010054011

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


Some comment has followed the recent action of a large insurance company in discontinuing its physicians' defense contract. No reason for this withdrawal has been given, though the natural presumption is that the business, at least for that company, proved unprofitable. There yet remain five general casualty companies that issue these contracts and one company devoted solely to this form of insurance. According to The Chronicle, an insurance weekly, the company that confines itself to this field issues a contract providing indemnity only for legal services incurred by a policy holder who is sued for malpractice. On the other hand, according to the same authority, the general casualty companies that solicit this business offer a contract that indemnifies for damages up to a certain figure as well as for legal expenses of defense. Unless other companies withdraw their contracts it will appear that some of them still find the risks

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview