Smith v. Finch
Georgia Supreme Court
681 S.E.2d 147 (2009)
- Written by Nicholas Decoster, JD
Facts
Justin Smith (plaintiff) went to a series of physicians and other health-care providers (the physicians) (defendants) after developing a rash across his hands, arms, legs, and feet. At the time, the physicians diagnosed Smith with a viral illness. Later, however, it was determined that Smith actually had a rare disease transmitted by ticks, which was known as Rocky Mountain spotted fever (RMSF). Smith’s parents sued the physicians on Smith’s behalf, claiming that the physicians had negligently failed to correctly diagnose Smith’s illness. At trial, expert witnesses for Smith testified that the physicians should have considered RMSF based on the symptoms displayed by Smith and the fact the illness was contracted in the summer in Georgia. The physicians claimed that Smith’s symptoms were equally consistent with their diagnosis of a viral illness. The trial court instructed the jury that the physicians could not be found negligent merely on the basis of hindsight, and that negligence did not include foreseeing illnesses that were only slightly possible. The jury returned a verdict for the physicians. Smith appealed, arguing that the jury instruction was incorrect and prejudicial.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hunstein, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 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.
