Kennedy v. Parrott
243 N.C. 355, 90 S.E.2d 754 (1956)
Facts: Plaintiff consented to an appendectomy; her doctor, while operating, the doc noticed some cysts and operated on them too. After the operation, the plaintiff developed phlebitis in her leg and sued the doctor for battery (thinking the vein cut while operating on the cysts led to blood clots).
Procedure: Trial level held a nonsuit for the defendant.
Issue: Did her consent cover the extended touching?
Holding: Yes.
Reasoning: When a surgeon is acting in a professional capacity, consent should be construed as broadly as possible (as a matter of policy). (PS- no longer good law.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I don't think the doctor should have operated on the cysts with out her knowledge. Only reason is because people are sue happy these days.
Love your posts especially the Hamer v. Sidway post.
Post a Comment