Physicians and Surgeons—Malpractice—Court Disregard for the Standard of the Profession—The Legislative Response—Helling v. Carey, 83 Wn. 2d 514, 519 P.2d 981 (1974); Wash. Rev. Code § 4.24.290 (Supp. 1975)

Peizer, Alan J.

Journal: Washington Law Review

Volume: 51

First Page: 167

Year: 1975

Bluebook Citation: 51 WASH. L. REV. 167 (1975)

Author: Alan J. Peizer: all 1 publication


Citation analytics

How this journal article sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

Cited
6
Citing decisions
2
Courts citing

Citations by decade

2
3
1
1970s1980s1990s

Courts citing this journal article

Wash.4
Wash. Ct. App.2
Most recently cited by6

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.


Abstract

This note will examine the relationship between the standard of care and the role of expert medical testimony in medical malpractice actions, discuss various interpretations of the Helling decision, and suggest the most practical of those interpretations, particularly in light of the subsequent enactment of R.C.W. § 4.24.290.5 The purpose of this statute was to nullify the Helling decision and re-establish the pre-Helling standards of negligence in medical malpractice cases. As will be demonstrated, although the statute in large part succeeds in allaying the fears of medical practitioners and defense attorneys which were induced by Helling v. Carey, the case retains significance in its potential for expanding lay participation in determining the applicable standard of care in medical malpractice cases.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.