Valles v. Albert Einstein Medical Center
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
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
- Nanty-Glo Boro. v. American Surety Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
- Murphy v. Duquesne University of Holy GhostSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
- Phillips v. A-Best Products Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- Thompson v. Nason HospitalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Moure v. RaeuchleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Shinal, M., et ux, Aplts. v. Toms M.D., S.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
- Stalsitz v. Allentown HospitalSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Cooper ex rel. Cooper v. Lankenau HospitalSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
- Cochran v. Wyeth, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
- Strine v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.