Davis v. Kraff

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting plaintiff’s argument “that she was not required to show that the undisclosed risk ever materialized”
• “The gravamen in an informed consent case requires the plaintiff to ‘point to significant undisclosed information relating to the treatment which would have altered her decision to undergo it.’”
• “[e]xpert testimony is admissible if the proffered expert is qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, and the testimony will assist the trier of fact in understanding the evidence” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• \[T]he plaintiff [must] show that the undisclosed risk actually occurred.\
• plaintiff would have not undergone LASIK theory with better consent

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).