Holmes v. Tsou
Appellant Carol Holmes (Holmes) appeals from a jury verdict in favor of respondent Paul Moody Tsou (Tsou) in a medical malpractice action. The gravamen of Holmess complaint was that Tsou was negligent in performing a non-surgical procedure to treat her fractured wrist and in failing to offer her a surgical option as an alternative treatment. Holmes now raises two arguments on appeal. First, she contends that the trial court erred in refusing to give the jury three special instructions that she requested on the issue of informed consent. Second, she claims that the trial court erroneously excluded evidence of a letter from the Medical Board of California concerning its conclusions about the treatment provided by Tsou. For the reasons set forth below, Court conclude that there was no error in the trial courts instructional and evidentiary rulings, and accordingly, affirm.
Comments on Holmes v. Tsou