Advertising Disclosure Email Disclosure

Informed consent and deviation from the standard of care are distinguishable and represent independent duties.

October 1, 2017
Ehrlich v. Sorokin, M.D., 2017 N.J.Super. LEXIS 114 (Decided July 25, 2017

The plaintiff appealed a jury verdict in favor of the defendant in a malpractice action against her gastroenterologist. At trial, the plaintiff contended her gastroenterologist was negligent in the performance of a colonoscopy. On appeal, the plaintiff argued the trial court erred when permitting the defendant to introduce evidence of signed consent forms indicating the procedure could result in injury and hospitalization. She argued this was not an informed consent case, but one of a deviation from the standard of care, because the doctor did not correctly perform the procedure.

The Appellate Panel reversed and remanded. In a detailed opinion, the Panel explained the difference between the two main theories of medical negligence: lack of informed consent and deviation from the standard of care. As this case did not involve informed consent, admission of such evidence could mislead the jury and was irrelevant. The Panel flatly rejected the defense argument that such information was relevant to counter testimony that the defendant failed to give the plaintiff information about her condition and treatment.

For practitioners this is a significant decision that cordons off (often defense-friendly) language in informed consent forms when the case only involves alleged deviations from the standard of care. The case should serve as a reminder that these two theories are distinguishable and represent independent duties. Therefore, documents that may be helpful could be subject to exclusion if not precisely related to a cause of action.

 

Case Law Alerts, 4th Quarter, October 2017 Case Law Alerts is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2017 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.

Affiliated Attorney

(973) 618-4153
narimassa@mdwcg.com

Practice Areas

Before you send this email please note:

You are attempting to send email, through a link on our website, to an attorney of Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin or an employee in our firm. Please note that your email may not be treated as confidential and does not create an attorney-client relationship. You should not rely upon the transmission of an email through this website if you are seeking to enter into such a relationship. Until such time as we have agreed to represent you, no information in your email will be treated as confidential. Please contact us directly by telephone at 1.800.220.3308 if it is your intent to seek legal counsel with our firm or convey confidential information.

If it is still your intent to send this email, knowing that it may not be treated as confidential, you may accept our terms of agreement by pressing "OK". If you choose not to accept these terms of agreement you may navigate away from this page by pressing "Cancel."