Legal Opinion

Valles v. Albert Einstein Medical Center

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 28, 2002PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Justice CAPPY.

We granted allocatur in order to address several issues regarding the scope of the informed consent doctrine. The Superior Court affirmed the entry of summary judgment in favor of Appellee Albert Einstein Medical Center (“AEMC”) and Cross-Appellant Jay Morros, M.D. (“Morros”). For the reasons set forth herein, we affirm the order of the Superior Court.

We view the facts in the light most favorable to Appellant Esmelinda Valles, as the non-moving party. Murphy v. Duquesne Univ. of the Holy Ghost, 565 Pa. 571, 777 A.2d 418, 429 (2001). Appellant’s claims arise from two…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Nanty-Glo Boro. v. American Surety Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  2. Murphy v. Duquesne University of Holy GhostSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  3. Phillips v. A-Best Products Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  4. Thompson v. Nason HospitalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  5. Moure v. RaeuchleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Shinal, M., et ux, Aplts. v. Toms M.D., S.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  2. Stalsitz v. Allentown HospitalSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  3. Cooper ex rel. Cooper v. Lankenau HospitalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  4. Cochran v. Wyeth, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
  5. Strine v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API