Docstoc

ASHCRAFT V. KING, Cal Ct. of Appeal, 2nd Dist, 1991, 278 Cal. Rptr. 900

Document Sample
ASHCRAFT V. KING, Cal Ct. of Appeal, 2nd Dist, 1991, 278 Cal. Rptr. 900 Powered By Docstoc
					TORTS
ASHCRAFT V. KING, Cal Ct. of Appeal, 2nd Dist, 1991, 278 Cal. Rptr. 900 History: Ashcraft sought damages for negligence and battery; trail court granted King’s motion for nonsuit on battery; jury returned verdict for King on negligence Plaintiff Ashcraft appeals from a judgment for Defendant King in this med malpractice case Facts: In 1983, Ashcraft (16) was diagnosed w/scoliosis and was referred to King; Ashcraft and her mom went to King for a consultation where he recommended surgery and generally told them about the procedure; they discussed blood transfusions during this meeting; King advised Ashcraft’s to contact the hospital to talk about family donated blood; Ashcraft’s mom, dad, and other relatives gave blood before and during the operation; Ashcraft never received that blood; the blood Ashcraft received came from general supplies on hand at the hospital In 1987, hospital discovered Ashcraft was infused w/blood from an HIV positive donor and tested positive Issue(s): Whether there was sufficient evidence from which jury could determine Ashcraft’s consent to the operation was conditioned on the use of family donated blood only and defendant King intentionally exceeded this condition in performing the operation. Holding: Judgment reversed as to Plaintiff’s cause of action for battery and remanded to the trial court; all other parts of judgment affirmed Analysis: Ashcraft’s consent to the operation was conditioned on the use of family blood In battery, intent is satisfied if the evidence shows defendant acted w/a “willful disregard” of plaintiff’s rights; King operated using blood for hospital’s general supply and not family blood, like Ashcraft had wanted


				
DOCUMENT INFO