Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 1999–2022 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Ashe v. Radiation Oncology Associatesgreen2 sentences2005See Ashe v. Radiation Oncology Assocs., 9 S.W.3d 119, 121 (Tenn. 1999); Blanchard v. Kellum, 975 S.W.2d 522, 524 (Tenn. 1998). 2002In Ashe v. Radiation Oncology Assocs., 9 S.W.3d 119,121 (Tenn. 1999), the Court distinguished a lack of informed consent claim from a medical battery claim involving the performance of an unauthorized medical procedure. | 3 | 3 |
Church v. Peralesgreen2 sentences2002Tennessee courts have consistently recognized the distinction drawn in Ashe that a physician’s failure to inform a patient of risks associated or inherent in the treatment provides the foundation for a lack of informed consent claim. -8- See Church v. Perales, 39 S.W.3d 149, 159 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000); Mitchell v. Kayem, 54 S.W.3d 775, 779 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). 2001See Church v. Perales, No. M19997- 00227-COA-RS-CV, 2000 WL 1183074, at *6 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000). | 3 | 3 |
Blanchard v. Kellumgreen2 sentences2005See Ashe v. Radiation Oncology Assocs., 9 S.W.3d 119, 121 (Tenn. 1999); Blanchard v. Kellum, 975 S.W.2d 522, 524 (Tenn. 1998). 2002According to the Court, “[a] lack of informed consent claim typically occurs when the patient was aware that the procedure was going to be performed but the patient was unaware of the risk associated with the procedure.” Id. (quoting Blanchard v. Kellum, 975 S.W.2d 522, 524 (Tenn. 1998)). | 2 | 3 |
Shadrick v. Cokergreen1 sentence2022Shadrick v. Coker, 963 S.W.2d 726, 733 (Tenn. 1998). | 1 | 1 |
Roberts v. Bicknellgreen1 sentence2022“A lack of informed consent claim, by its very nature, arises when an individual becomes aware of the fact that his physicians did not disclose some risk or complication.” Roberts v. Bicknell, 73 S.W.3d 106, 111 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). | 1 | 1 |
Sampson v. Schneidergreen1 sentence2022By way of illustration, this Court has previously held that the statute of limitations barred a plaintiff’s claim “because the plaintiff knew or should have known that the defendant had not fully informed her as soon as she began experiencing unadvised complications.” Sampson v. Schneider, 886 S.W.2d 764, 765 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994) (citing Housh v. Morris, 818 S.W.2d 39, 42 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991)). | 1 | 1 |
Housh v. Morrisgreen1 sentence2022By way of illustration, this Court has previously held that the statute of limitations barred a plaintiff’s claim “because the plaintiff knew or should have known that the defendant had not fully informed her as soon as she began experiencing unadvised complications.” Sampson v. Schneider, 886 S.W.2d 764, 765 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994) (citing Housh v. Morris, 818 S.W.2d 39, 42 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1991)). | 1 | 1 |
Campbell v. Pitt County Memorial Hospital, Inc.green2 sentences2007Id. at 1142; see also Randall v. United States, 859 F.Supp. 22, 32 (D.D.C.1994) (recognizing duty of hospital to inform the plaintiffs mother of the risks associated with a vaginal delivery in a lack of informed consent claim brought by child); Roberts v. Patel, 620 F.Supp. 323, 326 (N.D.Ill.1985) (holding that physicians owe a duty to obtain informed consent for both mother and child); Campbell v. Pitt County Mem’l Hosp., Inc., 84 N.C.App. 314 , 352 S.E.2d 902, 907 (N.C.Ct.App.), aff'd, 321 N.C. 260 , 362 S.E.2d 273 (N.C.1987) (holding that hospital had a duty to obtain informed consent for a 2007Id. at 1142; see also Randall v. United States, 859 F.Supp. 22, 32 (D.D.C.1994) (recognizing duty of hospital to inform the plaintiffs mother of the risks associated with a vaginal delivery in a lack of informed consent claim brought by child); Roberts v. Patel, 620 F.Supp. 323, 326 (N.D.Ill.1985) (holding that physicians owe a duty to obtain informed consent for both mother and child); Campbell v. Pitt County Mem’l Hosp., Inc., 84 N.C.App. 314 , 352 S.E.2d 902, 907 (N.C.Ct.App.), aff'd, 321 N.C. 260 , 362 S.E.2d 273 (N.C.1987) (holding that hospital had a duty to obtain informed consent for a | 1 | 1 |
Randall Ex Rel. Randall v. United Statesgreen1 sentence2007Id. at 1142; see also Randall v. United States, 859 F.Supp. 22, 32 (D.D.C.1994) (recognizing duty of hospital to inform the plaintiffs mother of the risks associated with a vaginal delivery in a lack of informed consent claim brought by child); Roberts v. Patel, 620 F.Supp. 323, 326 (N.D.Ill.1985) (holding that physicians owe a duty to obtain informed consent for both mother and child); Campbell v. Pitt County Mem’l Hosp., Inc., 84 N.C.App. 314 , 352 S.E.2d 902, 907 (N.C.Ct.App.), aff'd, 321 N.C. 260 , 362 S.E.2d 273 (N.C.1987) (holding that hospital had a duty to obtain informed consent for a | 1 | 1 |
Draper v. Jasionowskigreen1 sentence2007Id. at 1142; see also Randall v. United States, 859 F.Supp. 22, 32 (D.D.C.1994) (recognizing duty of hospital to inform the plaintiffs mother of the risks associated with a vaginal delivery in a lack of informed consent claim brought by child); Roberts v. Patel, 620 F.Supp. 323, 326 (N.D.Ill.1985) (holding that physicians owe a duty to obtain informed consent for both mother and child); Campbell v. Pitt County Mem’l Hosp., Inc., 84 N.C.App. 314 , 352 S.E.2d 902, 907 (N.C.Ct.App.), aff'd, 321 N.C. 260 , 362 S.E.2d 273 (N.C.1987) (holding that hospital had a duty to obtain informed consent for a | 1 | 1 |
Roberts Ex Rel. Roberts v. Patelgreen1 sentence2007Id. at 1142; see also Randall v. United States, 859 F.Supp. 22, 32 (D.D.C.1994) (recognizing duty of hospital to inform the plaintiffs mother of the risks associated with a vaginal delivery in a lack of informed consent claim brought by child); Roberts v. Patel, 620 F.Supp. 323, 326 (N.D.Ill.1985) (holding that physicians owe a duty to obtain informed consent for both mother and child); Campbell v. Pitt County Mem’l Hosp., Inc., 84 N.C.App. 314 , 352 S.E.2d 902, 907 (N.C.Ct.App.), aff'd, 321 N.C. 260 , 362 S.E.2d 273 (N.C.1987) (holding that hospital had a duty to obtain informed consent for a | 1 | 1 |
Mitchell v. Kayemgreen1 sentence2002Tennessee courts have consistently recognized the distinction drawn in Ashe that a physician’s failure to inform a patient of risks associated or inherent in the treatment provides the foundation for a lack of informed consent claim. -8- See Church v. Perales, 39 S.W.3d 149, 159 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000); Mitchell v. Kayem, 54 S.W.3d 775, 779 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Campbell v. Pitt County Memorial Hospital, Inc.
green
2 sentences2007Id. at 1142; see also Randall v. United States, 859 F.Supp. 22, 32 (D.D.C.1994) (recognizing duty of hospital to inform the plaintiffs mother of the risks associated with a vaginal delivery in a lack of informed consent claim brought by child); Roberts v. Patel, 620 F.Supp. 323, 326 (N.D.Ill.1985) (holding that physicians owe a duty to obtain informed consent for both mother and child); Campbell v. Pitt County Mem’l Hosp., Inc., 84 N.C.App. 314 , 352 S.E.2d 902, 907 (N.C.Ct.App.), aff'd, 321 N.C. 260 , 362 S.E.2d 273 (N.C.1987) (holding that hospital had a duty to obtain informed consent for a 2007Id. at 1142; see also Randall v. United States, 859 F.Supp. 22, 32 (D.D.C.1994) (recognizing duty of hospital to inform the plaintiffs mother of the risks associated with a vaginal delivery in a lack of informed consent claim brought by child); Roberts v. Patel, 620 F.Supp. 323, 326 (N.D.Ill.1985) (holding that physicians owe a duty to obtain informed consent for both mother and child); Campbell v. Pitt County Mem’l Hosp., Inc., 84 N.C.App. 314 , 352 S.E.2d 902, 907 (N.C.Ct.App.), aff'd, 321 N.C. 260 , 362 S.E.2d 273 (N.C.1987) (holding that hospital had a duty to obtain informed consent for a | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.