Hi michelle, did you just hire a physician?

IF you use the medical director's name to promote your business.... that person is liable for all the problems that arise from treatments ESPECIALLY WHEN THAT PERSON IS NOT ON SITE (I am assuming you mean an M.D.). This does not forgive you from being liable for what you do as owner. You are responsible for whatever goes on in your place of business.
IF the medical director is an M.D. they have to be HUNGRY TO MAKE A BUCK to allow their name to be used as lawyers go after the deepest pockets (you are not without guilt). Most non-lawyers have little knowledge of the use of words in the legal arena. I've read many posts here that are impossible for me to comprehend. Every time they mention s name they are getting deeper into trouble. You could be slandering someone and causing them to lose business for which they can sue you. ASK A LAWYER. It is the cheapest way to avoid problems and that is better than having a lawyer get you out of trouble.
REMEMBER>>>>> NOT ALL LAWYERS ARE SUPER AT WHAT THEY DO. THEY USE A DIFFERENT LANGUAGE AND PLAY BY DIFFERENT RULES. LOOK OUT. A former editor of FORTUNE magazine said," Laws are made by lawyers... for lawyers.. with no regard for anyone else." That is the way they think..

leftyg-
Your information is incorrect.

The use of a medical director's name to promote a business does not create legal liability for the MD. It is only when treatment is provided under that MD's license (regardless of whether the MD, RN, or esthetician performs treatment) that there is a possibility of liability for the MD.

If there is ever an adverse reaction to a treatment performed, and the situation escalates to lawyers, that is when malpractice insurance comes into play. An MD's insurance is their responsibilty, not the owner of the venue they practice in.

Why would an MD who has agreed to offer a service in Michelle's business then sue her for slander for promoting that agreement? What you're saying really doesn't make sense.

I am assuming that a business owner is wise enough to have a legal agreement in place for anyone they partner with. I agree that it is a little more complicated to partner with an MD because most state's medical boards won't allow a MD to be employed by a non medical professional. So again, I agree, that a lawyer with experience in MedSpas can be invaluable.

But that is not what the OP is asking about.

Michelle-could you provide more information about what services besides injectibles will be provided? Right now it sounds as though the MD will be doing her own injections with no other services?

leftyg-
Your information is incorrect.

The use of a medical director's name to promote a business does not create legal liability for the MD. It is only when treatment is provided under that MD's license (regardless of whether the MD, RN, or esthetician performs treatment) that there is a possibility of liability for the MD.

If there is ever an adverse reaction to a treatment performed, and the situation escalates to lawyers, that is when malpractice insurance comes into play. An MD's insurance is their responsibilty, not the owner of the venue they practice in.

Why would an MD who has agreed to offer a service in Michelle's business then sue her for slander for promoting that agreement? What you're saying really doesn't make sense.

I am assuming that a business owner is wise enough to have a legal agreement in place for anyone they partner with. I agree that it is a little more complicated to partner with an MD because most state's medical boards won't allow a MD to be employed by a non medical professional. So again, I agree, that a lawyer with experience in MedSpas can be invaluable.

But that is not what the OP is asking about.

Michelle-could you provide more information about what services besides injectibles will be provided? Right now it sounds as though the MD will be doing her own injections with no other services?

I disagree with both Lefty and BetterOffNow.

The Medical Director is probably aiding and abetting in the unlicensed practice of medicine with this arrangement.

The non-licensed layperson owner is practicing medicine without a license just by ownership of the "boutique"-turned-medical practice and employing a physician.

And what is a "boutique"?

And in what state is this boutique? It makes a big difference as to legality of the entire concept.