Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 2317
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 2317.54 (2026)

Informed consent to surgical or medical procedure or course of procedures

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
April 6, 2023
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 558 - 134th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

No hospital, home health agency, ambulatory surgical facility, or provider of a hospice care program, pediatric respite care program, or pediatric transition care program shall be held liable for a physician's failure to obtain an informed consent from the physician's patient prior to a surgical or medical procedure or course of procedures, unless the physician is an employee of the hospital, home health agency, ambulatory surgical facility, or provider of a hospice care program, pediatric respite care program, or pediatric transition care program.

Written consent to a surgical or medical procedure or course of procedures shall, to the extent that it fulfills all the requirements in divisions (A), (B), and (C) of this section, be presumed to be valid and effective, in the absence of proof by a preponderance of the evidence that the person who sought such consent was not acting in good faith, or that the execution of the consent was induced by fraudulent misrepresentation of material facts, or that the person executing the consent was not able to communicate effectively in spoken and written English or any other language in which the consent is written. Except as herein provided, no evidence shall be admissible to impeach, modify, or limit the authorization for performance of the procedure or procedures set forth in such written consent.

(A) The consent sets forth in general terms the nature and purpose of the procedure or procedures, and what the procedures are expected to accomplish, together with the reasonably known risks, and, except in emergency situations, sets forth the names of the physicians who shall perform the intended surgical procedures.

(B) The person making the consent acknowledges that such disclosure of information has been made and that all questions asked about the procedure or procedures have been answered in a satisfactory manner.

(C) The consent is signed by the patient for whom the procedure is to be performed, or, if the patient for any reason including, but not limited to, competence, minority, or the fact that, at the latest time that the consent is needed, the patient is under the influence of alcohol, hallucinogens, or drugs, lacks legal capacity to consent, by a person who has legal authority to consent on behalf of such patient in such circumstances, including either of the following:

(1) The parent, whether the parent is an adult or a minor, of the parent's minor child;

(2) An adult whom the parent of the minor child has given written authorization to consent to a surgical or medical procedure or course of procedures for the parent's minor child.

Any use of a consent form that fulfills the requirements stated in divisions (A), (B), and (C) of this section has no effect on the common law rights and liabilities, including the right of a physician to obtain the oral or implied consent of a patient to a medical procedure, that may exist as between physicians and patients on July 28, 1975.

As used in this section the term "hospital" has the same meaning as in section 2305.113 of the Revised Code; "ambulatory surgical facility" has the same meaning as in section 3702.30 of the Revised Code; "hospice care program," "pediatric respite care program," and "pediatric transition care program" have the same meanings as in section 3712.01 of the Revised Code, and "home health agency" has the same meaning as in section 3740.01 of the Revised Code. The provisions of this division apply to hospitals, doctors of medicine, doctors of osteopathic medicine, and doctors of podiatric medicine.

Last updated March 15, 2023 at 12:41 PM

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case: Zivich v. Mentor Soccer Club, Inc., 696 N.E.2d 201 (Ohio 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Zivich v. Mentor Soccer Club, Inc., 696 N.E.2d 201 (Ohio 1998). · cites it 2× “” He found it notable that the law empowers a parent to consent to medical procedures for a minor child (R.C. 2317.54[C]), gives a parent the general authority to decide to decline medical treatment for the child, and destroys the child’s cause of action for battery when consent…”
Zivich v. Mentor Soccer Club, Inc., 1998 Ohio 389 (Ohio 1998). · cites it 2× “” He found it notable that the law empowers a parent to consent to medical procedures for a minor child (R.C. 2317.54[C]), gives a parent the general authority to decide to decline medical treatment for the child, and destroys the child’s cause of action for battery when consent…”
Crystal BLACKWELL, as Next Friend to Jacob Blackwell, a Minor v. SKY HIGH SPORTS NASHVILLE OPERATIONS, LLC, 523 S.W.3d 624 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2017). “(citing Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2317.54 [C]; Lacey v.”
Logan v. Greenwich Hosp. Ass'n, 465 A.2d 294 (Conn. 1983). “Health Law § 2805 -d (1) (McKinney 1977); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 2317.54 (Baldwin Sup.”
Bedel v. Univ. of Cincinnati Hosp., 669 N.E.2d 9 (Ohio Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 3× “In a decision filed January 17,1995, the court found that the University of Cincinnati Hospital was not entitled to the presumption of validity, set forth in R.C. 2317.54, regarding the three consent forms Potts signed.”
Tausch v. Riverview Health Inst., L.L.C., 931 N.E.2d 613 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010). “On appeal from a summary judgment for the hospital on its statute-of-limitations defense, the Third District Court of Appeals first found that the hospital was not liable on the informed-consent claim, per R.C. 2317.54, because the surgeon was its independent contractor.”
Saxe v. United States, 577 F. Supp. 135 (N.D. Ohio 1983). · cites it 2× “Ohio Revised Code Section 2317.54 provides that written consent to a medical procedure shall be presumed valid when it is acknowledged, signed, and: The consent sets forth in general terms the nature of the procedure or procedures, and what the procedures are expected to…”
Preterm Cleveland v. Voinovich, 627 N.E.2d 570 (Ohio Ct. App. 1993). “2d 1145 , and R.C. 2317.54. Indeed, the requirement for informing the woman about abortion alternatives, such as adoption, does not appear to require anything grossly out of the ordinary in the medical setting.”
Greynolds v. Kurman, 632 N.E.2d 946 (Ohio Ct. App. 1993). “We do not address the issue of whether Ohio’s informed consent statute, R.C. 2317.54, or ■ cases interpreting it require a physician to personally obtain informed consent.”
Saylor v. Providence Hosp., 680 N.E.2d 193 (Ohio Ct. App. 1996). “2d 1145 ; R.C. 2317.54. This also disposes of the Saylors’ second assignment of error because the record clearly demonstrates, as to a medical claim against the hospital, that Mrs.”
Shell v. Durrani, 2015 Ohio 4140 (Ohio Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 9× “{¶ 11} Shell argues she was entitled to a judgment notwithstanding the verdict because the CAST Consent Form did not (1) specify the surgery to be performed on March 12, 2010, (2) name the physician who was to perform the surgery, and (3) detail the material risks presented by…”
Yu v. Ohio State Univ. Med. Ctr., 2017 Ohio 8697 (Ohio Ct. Cl. 2017). · cites it 5× “) R.C. 2317.54 states, in part: “No hospital, home health agency, ambulatory surgical facility, or provider of a hospice care program or pediatric respite care program shall be held liable for a physician’s failure to obtain an informed consent from the physician’s patient prior…”
Show all 18 citing cases →
— Ohio Rev. Code § 2317.54(C) — 3 cases
Zivich v. Mentor Soccer Club, Inc., 696 N.E.2d 201 (Ohio 1998). “” He found it notable that the law empowers a parent to consent to medical procedures for a minor child (R.C. 2317.54[C]), gives a parent the general authority to decide to decline medical treatment for the child, and destroys the child’s cause of action for battery when consent…”
Zivich v. Mentor Soccer Club, Inc., 1998 Ohio 389 (Ohio 1998). “” He found it notable that the law empowers a parent to consent to medical procedures for a minor child (R.C. 2317.54[C]), gives a parent the general authority to decide to decline medical treatment for the child, and destroys the child’s cause of action for battery when consent…”
Brotherton v. Cleveland, 733 F. Supp. 56 (S.D. Ohio 1989).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.