What is Katz argument: The Court ruled that Katz was entitled to Fourth Amendment protection for his conversations and that a physical intrusion into the area he occupied was unnecessary to bring the Amendment into play. "The Fourth Amendment protects people, not places," wrote Justice Potter Stewart for the Court.
What is the Katz v United States holding: The Court ruled that Katz was entitled to Fourth Amendment protection for his conversations and that a physical intrusion into the area he occupied was unnecessary to bring the Amendment into play. "The Fourth Amendment protects people, not places," wrote Justice Potter Stewart for the Court.
Answer: The physician is being sued. Insurance company should provide an attorney. If the doctor is negligent, insurance company should pay (that's why we have premiums). Dr. Z is sued, goes to agency, and notifies the agency. The agency doesn't notify Aetna in right amount of time, and also notifies the wrong company. Aetna doesn't have a liability because they were not notified in a timely manner. Larson is agent to Aetna. A principal's notice to agent=notice to principal. That's the same as notifying Aetna according to its claims procedure. This is not Dr.Z's problem. Aetna is wrong in denying coverage, and Dr.Z will succeed and not have to pay.
Answer:
True
Explanation:
Because Social teaches us for the right for our future and to educate others.
