Legal Opinion
Sangiuolo v. Leventhal
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 30, 1986PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Stanley L. Sklar, J.
ISSUE
Does a "substitute” physician, administering part of a *681course of treatment started by a physician for whom he is covering, have an obligation to advise of the risks, benefits and alternatives of that treatment? This court holds that the substitute has that obligation.
FACTS
On January 30, 1978, Dr. Gerald Leventhal consulted with Ms. Josephine Sangiuolo concerning her complaints of joint pain which had been diagnosed as rheumatoid arthritis. A note appears in Dr. Leventhal’s office records for that date reading: "Patient advised of possible Gold…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Schloendorff v. Society of the New York HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1914
- Salgo v. Leland Stanford Jr. University Board of TrusteesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- Fiorentino v. WengerNew York Court of Appeals · 1967
- Graddy v. New York Medical CollegeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1963
- Moulton v. HuckleberryOregon Supreme Court · 1935
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Rigie v. GoldmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Shkolnik v. Hospital for Joint Diseases Orthopaedic InstituteAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Perez v. Park Madison Professional Laboratories, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995