Legal Opinion
Spar v. Cha
Indiana Supreme Court
Decided June 16, 2009No. 45S05-0906-CV-273PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BOEHM, Justice.
We hold that, with possible exceptions not relevant here, incurred risk is not a defense to medical malpractice based on negligence or lack of informed consent. We also hold that the plaintiff's consents to prior surgeries were admissible to counter her lack-of-informed-consent claim to the extent that claim was based on failure to inform her of typical risks in the procedure. We reverse and remand for a new trial.
Facts and Procedural History
Brenda Spar brought this medical malpractice action against obstetrician/gyne-ecologist Jin S. Cha, who performed laparo-scopic surgery on…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Bader v. JohnsonIndiana Supreme Court · 2000
- Morrison v. MacNamaraDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
- Logan v. Greenwich Hospital Ass'nSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Oelling v. RaoIndiana Supreme Court · 1992
- Blackburn v. DortaSupreme Court of Florida · 1977
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Manley v. ShererIndiana Court of Appeals · 2011
- Planned Parenthood of Indiana, Inc. v. Commissioner of the Indiana State Department of HealthDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana · 2011
- Roger Jay Piatek, M.D., and the Piatek Institute v. Shairon BealeIndiana Court of Appeals · 2013
- Francisco Perez, Jr., Individually, and by Laura Aguirre his natural guardian and next friend, and Laura Aguirre, Individually v. Michael Hu, M.D. St. Catherine Hospital of East Chicago Indiana, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2017
- Thompson v. GerowitzIndiana Court of Appeals · 2011
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.