Montz v. Williams

Summary

The Louisiana Supreme Court held that plaintiffs in a medical malpractice informed-consent action bore the burden of proving the specific information and steps required to obtain valid consent for the procedure at issue. Because the jury’s choice between competing expert opinions was reasonably supported by the evidence, the court reversed the Court of Appeal and reinstated the district court judgment.

Holdings

1. The jury's finding was not manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong because the evidence presented permissible competing views concerning the applicable informed-consent standard, and the jury was entitled to credit the defendant's experts.
2. Because the requirement of informed consent was undisputed, plaintiffs were required to prove what steps and information the physician had to provide to obtain valid consent for the particular procedure under the circumstances.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the jury's finding that plaintiffs failed to prove the applicable informed-consent standard of care was manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong.
2. Whether plaintiffs had to prove merely that informed consent was required, or instead had to prove the specific steps and information required to obtain valid consent for the procedure at issue.

Disposition

reversed