Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Ouellette v. Subak

391 N.W.2d 810 (1986)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...

Ouellette v. Subak

Minnesota Supreme Court

391 N.W.2d 810 (1986)

Facts

Julie Ouellette suspected she was pregnant in February, and on March 11, family practitioner Dr. Barbara Subak (defendant) calculated her due date as October 12. Dr. Subak and Dr. Maxine Nelson (defendant) performed several examinations throughout Julie’s pregnancy. However, none of the markers of a typical pregnancy aligned with the due date that Dr. Subak calculated. On November 30, Dr. Subak consulted with obstetrician Dr. John T. Moehn, who recommended terminating the pregnancy. The next morning, Dr. Mitchell Pincus delivered Kristian Ouellette (plaintiff) via Caesarean section. Kristian was born with brain damage and permanent, severely diminished physical and mental capacity. When Kristian was six years old, he only had the functional development of between six and 13 months. The Ouellettes sued Dr. Subak and Dr. Nelson for negligence in permitting a prolonged pregnancy, failing to timely induce labor, and ignoring signs of fetal distress. The doctors argued that they did not err in diagnosing or treating Julie’s pregnancy, but if they did err, it was not negligence but rather an honest error in professional judgment, and that any alleged negligence did not cause Kristian’s condition. The trial court refused to give the doctors’ requested jury instructions that doctors are not responsible for an honest error in judgment. A jury by special verdict found the doctors negligent. The doctors appealed, and the court of appeals reversed and remanded for a new trial. The Ouellettes appealed the reversal to the Minnesota Supreme Court, claiming that the trial court correctly refused to give the instruction on honest error in judgment.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Kelley, 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 602,000 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 602,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 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 602,000 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
  • 33,600 briefs - keyed to 984 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