Wilkins v. Reisman

No matter how much the majority strains at changing the posture of this case, their efforts are in vain. In reversing this judgment the majority fails to follow established precedent and, without any record to support appellant's allegations, the majority finds appellant’s challenge to the “fundamental fairness” of the entire trial sufficient to order a new trial. I dissent.

At the close of the evidence, the trial court submitted five questions to the jury: (1) whether Dr. Reisman failed to disclose the risks and hazards of the treatment, (2) was such a proximate cause; (3) was Dr. Reisman…