Fuller v. Tucker

84 Cal. App. 4th 1163, 101 Cal. Rptr. 2d 776 (2000)

From our private database of 46,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Fuller v. Tucker

California Court of Appeal
84 Cal. App. 4th 1163, 101 Cal. Rptr. 2d 776 (2000)

JL

Facts

Annie Fuller (plaintiff) had a bladder-lift surgery in 1995. During this surgery, Fuller sustained a nerve injury that paralyzed her right lower extremity. Dr. James Tucker (defendant) was the anesthesiologist for the Fuller’s surgery. Tucker’s name was not on the anesthesia-consent form. Fuller was illiterate, and no one explained the form to her, including the risks and complications of anesthesia. However, Tucker’s name was included in Fuller’s medical records, and Tucker evaluated Fuller the day after surgery. Fuller noticed extreme weakness in her right leg immediately after surgery. Fuller saw two neurologists about her injury, but neither neurologist told Fuller what caused her nerve injury. Fuller sued several parties, including a John Doe. After the statute of limitations had passed, Fuller filed an amended complaint that named Tucker as the John Doe. Tucker alleged that the claim against him was time-barred. After a bench trial on the timeliness issue, the trial court determined that: (1) Fuller should have known that an anesthesiologist would have a significant role in the surgery and (2) Fuller should have discovered Tucker’s name in her medical records. Based on this, the trial court found that Fuller’s Doe amendment was untimely and granted judgment for Tucker. Fuller appealed to the California Court of Appeal.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Aldrich, J.)

What to do next…

  1. 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 748,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 748,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,100 briefs, keyed to 987 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 748,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,100 briefs - keyed to 987 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership