Jones v. Chidester

610 A.2d 964 (1992)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
J
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Jones v. Chidester

Pennsylvania Supreme Court
610 A.2d 964 (1992)

Facts

Dr. John Chidester (defendant) used a tourniquet to minimize bleeding issues while performing a leg operation on Billy Jones (plaintiff). After the surgery, Jones suffered a nerve injury that caused foot issues. Jones believed the tourniquet had caused the nerve injury, and he sued Chidester for medical malpractice. The two sides each had medical experts who disagreed about whether using a tourniquet in that situation was an acceptable medical practice. The trial court told the jury that Chidester was not liable for medical malpractice if a reputable and respected body of medical experts supported the tourniquet use, even if another body of medical experts would have chosen a different procedure or treatment. The jury found for Chidester, and the claim was dismissed. Jones appealed, arguing that the trial court had erred by saying that the body of experts had to be “reputable and respected.” Jones claimed that the correct standard was whether a considerable number of medical experts approved a given treatment option.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Papadakos, J.)

Concurrence (Zappala, J.)

Concurrence (McDermott, 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 811,000 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 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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 811,000 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
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 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

Casebooks

Healthcare Law

Key Terms