1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Cal.Rptr.2d
  4. 106 Cal.Rptr.2d
  5. 106 Cal.Rptr.2d 70 (2001)
 

PERRY v. SHAW

No. B133608.

106 Cal.Rptr.2d 70 (2001)

88 Cal.App.4th 658

Sandra PERRY, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. William SHAW et al., Defendants and Appellants.

Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division One.

Review Denied August 22, 2001.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Garcia, Emmons, Maranga & Morgenstern, Joseph G. Emmons; Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland, Martin Stein and Jennifer L. King, Beverly Hills, for Defendants and Appellants.

Thelen Reid & Priest, Curtis A. Cole, Fresno, and Kenneth R. Pedroza, Los Angeles, for California Medical Association, California Dental Association and California Healthcare Association as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants.

Fogel, Feldman, Ostrov, Ringler & Klevens, Larry R. Feldman, Jan G. Levine and David Bricker, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

MIRIAM A. VOGEL, J.

In 1972, our Supreme Court held that when a patient gives permission to a doctor to perform one type of surgical procedure but the doctor performs a substantially different operation, "the requisite element of deliberate intent to deviate from the consent given is present" and a battery has been committed. (Cobbs v. Grant (1972) 8 Cal.3d 229, 239-240, 104 Cal.Rptr. 505

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases