In Re Alma B.
21 CAL.APP.4TH 1037, 26 CAL.RPTR.2D 592, 1994.CA.47830
-
- 0,99 €
-
- 0,99 €
Descrição da editora
Plaintiff, Harry Jambazian, appeals from a summary judgment in favor of defendant, Joseph Borden, D.P.M., on a complaint for medical malpractice. We conclude plaintiffs failure to present legally admissible opinion testimony to controvert that submitted by defendant warranted summary judgment be granted on the medical negligence and informed consent claims. In so concluding, we determine that plaintiff had a responsibility to present opinion testimony that he suffered from diabetes by a properly qualified medical witness in his summary judgment opposition to controvert defense evidence that he had no diabetic condition. Further, plaintiff had a duty to present properly qualified medical opinion evidence that his alleged diabetic condition created surgical risks other than those related by defendant prior to the procedure. This is because the existence of a diabetic condition was a factual predicate of plaintiffs claim he was not properly informed of the effect of surgery because he had diabetes. We affirm.