Legal Opinion

Smith v. Cotter

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided April 30, 1991No. 20913PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

2Per curiam

This is a medical malpractice action. After a bench trial, the district court awarded damages against Dr. Lindsay Smith because of his negligent failure to obtain James Cotter’s informed consent to a surgical operation, a total thyroidectomy.

Cotter claims that Dr. Smith failed to inform him that he could suffer paralyzed vocal cords and an obstructed airway as a complication of the surgery. Dr. Smith claims that he told Cotter of the risk and that, even if he did not, he was not fequired by professional standards to tell Cotter of this risk. There is ample evidence to support the trial…

3Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Beattie v. ThomasNevada Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Di Filippo v. PrestonSupreme Court of Delaware · 1961
  3. Downer v. VeilleuxSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1974
  4. Woolley v. HendersonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1980
  5. Shirley Karp, Individually, Etc. v. Denton A. Cooley and Domingo S. LiottaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1974

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

4Cited by13 opinions

  1. Christian Lewis v. Sheila D. MooreCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2018
  2. Ketchup v. HowardCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2001
  3. Cochran v. Wyeth, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010
  4. Bronneke v. RutherfordNevada Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Christian Lewis v. Sheila D. MooreCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2017

8 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