Bly v. Rhoads
Virginia Supreme Court
222 S.E.2d 783 (1976)
- Written by Eric Miller, JD
Facts
Betty Bly (plaintiff) was advised by her physician, John Rhoads (defendant), that Bly should undergo exploratory surgery and a hysterectomy to treat abdominal pain. Bly consented. After the surgery, Bly experienced complications that required further surgery. Bly brought a medical malpractice action against Rhoads. Bly alleged that Rhoads failed to provide information on the risks of the hysterectomy and on available alternatives. Testimony supporting Bly’s claim was provided by a physician whose practice was located in another state. The trial court found that the physician’s testimony did not meet the court’s standard for expertise because the physician was unfamiliar with the medical practices of the local community. The trial court granted summary judgment for Rhoads. Bly appealed, asserting that expert testimony from a physician is not necessary in informed-consent cases. The Virginia Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Carrico, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
