legal news


Register | Forgot Password

CHARLES v. ANDREW
A medical malpractice action against medical doctor where plaintiff, who was a paraplegic before the procedure, suffered a torn rotator cuff and a fractured shoulder during a manipulation under an anesthesia procedure performed by a chiropractor, assisted by the medical doctor. Whether doctor had a duty to obtain plaintiff's informed consent, even though the procedure was going to be performed by the chiropractor, was a question of fact for the jury to determine. Trial court erred in concluding that, as a matter of law, there was insufficient evidence of causation for a jury to find in favor of plaintiff. A jury reasonably could determine that an adult paraplegic who was suffering problems with stiffness and flexibility, but was functional in his then current condition, who was seeing some improvement in his condition through physical therapy, who had suffered devastating damage from surgery in the past, and who was so concerned about the potential risks associated with the recommended procedure that he took his mother with him to question the medical doctor on the topic, would turn down the opportunity for the procedure if informed that it could result in a loss of his remaining mobility due to a torn rotator cuff or a fractured bone.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale