Analysis Of A Medical Malpractice Case

In this memo, I will discuss two legal issues. In the first part, I will discuss whether there was sufficient evidence of negligence while performing surgery so as to sustain a jury verdict for the plaintiff. Secondly, I will discuss whether the instructions to the jury adequately explained the nature of a medical doctor’s duty in obtaining an informed consent of a patient before undertaking any treatment. This case is said to be a medical negligence as well as a medical malpractice case in which the Plaintiff has suffered multiple surgeries and damages due to the negligence by the medical practitioner who is the Defendant of this case. The case is decided by the Supreme court of California. Basically, this case has two issues - 1) There was

On doing an X-ray, it was discovered that the plaintiff was developing a gastric ulcer. This was again an inherent risk associated with the surgery which was performed to relieve the duodenal ulcer. And this has not been communicated to the plaintiff prior to the duodenal ulcer surgery. Dr. Sands who treated Cobbs has initially tried to treat the gastric ulcer by antacids and strict diet. But with blood vomitings, it was evident that third operation should be performed. A gastrectomy was performed with removal of 50% of the plaintiff 's stomach to reduce the acid producing capacity. Plaintiff was discharged, but subsequently he was hospitalized again when he began to bleed again. When the bleeding reduced, he was finally discharged a week after.

Cobbs (Plaintiff) raised a malpractice suit against his surgeon Dr.Grant. So, the case got into the court after Plaintiff raised a malpractice suit against his surgeon. So, from the defendants ' side there were three experts testified at the trail - The defendant, Dr. Sands (the surgeon) and Defendants expert Dr. Yates. But no expert witness was produced by the Plaintiff in this