Legal Opinion
Hayes v. Camel
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided August 7, 2007No. SC 17430PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
NORCOTT, J.
The sole issue in this appeal is whether, in a medical malpractice action without a claim of lack of informed consent, the trial court properly admitted testimonial and documentary evidence that the defendant surgeon had informed his patient of the risks of the medical procedure in question. The plaintiffs, Frederick Hayes and Barbara Hayes, 1 brought this action for medical malpractice and loss of consortium against the defendants, Mark H. Camel and Paul Apostolides, arising from their alleged negligence in the surgical treatment of the plaintiff. The plaintiff appeals 2…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- State v. SkakelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
- Logan v. Greenwich Hospital Ass'nSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- State v. SawyerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
- PSE Consulting, Inc. v. MercedeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
- Boone v. William W. Backus HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2005
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Mitchell, L. v. E. Shikora, D.O., Aplts.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
- Wiseman v. ArmstrongSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- Brady, M. v. Urbas D.P.M., W., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
- Sullivan v. Metro-North Commuter RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
- Klein v. Norwalk HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.