Mitchell, L. v. E. Shikora, D.O., Aplts.
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1ConcurrenceJustice Wecht
I concur in the result reached by the learned Majority. I write separately to highlight four areas of concern.
I
As the Majority notes, evidence of consent is not relevant to the issue of negligence, inasmuch as a patient's consent does not make a physician's negligence more or less probable. Maj. Op. at 317-18. On the other hand, evidence of risks and complications "may aid the jury in determining both the standard of care and whether the physician's conduct deviated from the standard of care." Id. at 318. Importantly, the Majority recognizes that *324these are "two discrete categories of…
Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part.
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
- Toogood v. RogalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Quinby v. Plumsteadville Family Practice, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Lobalzo v. VaroliSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
- Passarello v. GrumbineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.