Supreme Court of New Jersey
545 A.2d 148 (1988)
Ostrowski (plaintiff) consulted Dr. Azzara (defendant), a podiatrist, for a sore left big toe. Ostrowski was heavy smoker, an insulin-dependent diabetic, and obese. Azzara diagnosed Ostrowski with a fungal disease of the toenail requiring its removal. Tests conducted by Azzara also revealed that Ostrowski had very high blood sugar levels and some peripheral vascular disease. Azzara explained to Ostrowski that she could loose a limb if she did not better monitor her blood sugar levels and her weight. After the procedure was performed, Ostrowski continued to smoke against Azzara’s medical advice. Also, her toe became painful, discolored, and pre-gangrenous due to a lack of blood circulating to the toe to aid in the healing process. As a result of her poor circulation from the diabetes and her smoking habits, Ostrowski required two operations and a vein transplant procedure in an attempt to save her foot and leg from amputation. Ostrowski filed suit against Azzara for malpractice and at trial, Azzara was permitted to present evidence that Ostrowski significantly contributed to her injuries because she continued to smoke against medical advice and failed to maintain her weight, diet, and blood sugar at acceptable levels. No medical expert for either side testified that Ostrowski’s post-treatment health habits could have caused her need for surgery six weeks after Azzara’s toenail removal. The jury found Azzara acted negligently by removing Ostrowski’s toenail without adequate consideration of her vascular condition, but denied Ostrowski any damages because she was more at fault for continuing to smoke and failing to properly take care of herself after the procedure. The court of appeals affirmed the jury’s verdict in favor of Azzara and Ostrowski appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (O’Hern, 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 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.