Fein v. Permanente Medical Group
Supreme Court of California
695 P.2d 665 (1985)
When Lawrence Fein (plaintiff) experienced chest pains, he went to his physician’s office at Permanente Medical Group (Permanente) (defendant), an affiliate of Kaiser Health Foundation (Kaiser). Fein was only able to see a nurse practitioner, Cheryl Welch. After examining him and consulting with Dr. Wintrop Frantz, Welch told Fein that he likely had a muscle spasm and prescribed Valium. When the medication had no effect and the pains worsened, Fein went to the Kaiser emergency room where Dr. Lowell Redding took an x-ray and, like Welch, advised Fein that he had a muscle spasm. Still suffering, Fein later returned to the emergency room where Dr. Donald Oliver ordered an electrocardiogram (EKG). The EKG showed that Fein was having a heart attack; he was admitted and treated without surgery. Fein sued Permanente in a California court for medical malpractice, arguing that the correct diagnosis should have been made earlier so as to prevent the heart attack or lessen its effects. At trial, a Dr. Harold Swan testified on Fein’s behalf that an EKG should have been ordered on the basis of the symptoms presented to Welch and Redding. Dr. Swan estimated that the late diagnosis of Fein caused him to lose half of his remaining life expectancy. Witnesses for Permanente offered strongly conflicting evidence. In empaneling the jury, the judge excused for statutory cause all potential jurors who were members of Kaiser, which amounted to 24 of 60 potential jurors. The judge reasoned, based on past experience, that conducting individual voir dire of such Kaiser members would be extremely time-consuming. In the charge to the jury, the judge instructed them that the standard of care required of a nurse practitioner was the same as that required of a physician or surgeon if the nurse practitioner were examining or diagnosing a patient. The jury found for Fein and awarded him approximately $1 million in damages. Permanente appealed, citing, inter alia, the exclusion of Kaiser members from the jury and the instruction as to Welch as bases for reversible error.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Kaus, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 166,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 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.