Zieber v. Bogert
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ZAPPALA, Justice.
This appeal presents the issue of whether a plaintiff in a medical malpractice action may introduce, as an element of damages, evidence regarding his increased risk of recurrence of cancer. The Superior Court held that evidence of the future effects of a disease already contracted, such as the probability of metastasis of cancer, is a proper consideration for the jury when awarding damages. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
On June 6, 1992, Robert Zieber experienced severe abdominal pain. His wife, a resident in obstetrics and gynecology, felt what appeared to be…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Phillips v. A-Best Products Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- Simmons v. Pacor, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
- Gradel v. InouyeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Marinari v. Asbestos Corp., Ltd.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Commonwealth v. MinerdSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. AyersSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Eichman v. McKeonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. DenglerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- McNeil v. JordanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Castellani, R., Aplts. v. Scranton TimesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.