Logourl black
From our private database of 13,800+ case briefs...

Tisdale v. Pruitt, Jr., M.D.

Court of Appeals of South Carolina
394 S.E.2d 857 (1990)


Facts

Laurel Tisdale (plaintiff) consulted her long-time family physician regarding a problem she was having with a pregnancy. The physician recommended that a dilation and curettage (D and C) be performed and he arranged for her to be admitted to a hospital for further diagnosis and treatment. Before admission, Tisdale’s insurance carrier required her to obtain a second opinion and referred her to Dr. A. Bert Pruitt, Jr., (defendant). Tisdale went to Pruitt’s office and completed paperwork indicating that she was there solely for a second opinion. Pruitt failed to read her chart and proceeded not only to examine her but to perform the D & C, which he did inadequately. A second procedure was required and was performed by her family physician under general anesthesia at the hospital. Tisdale brought a medical malpractice action against Pruitt alleging assault and battery, negligence, recklessness and willfulness and claimed the D & C procedure was unauthorized and performed without obtaining informed consent. At trial, Tisdale testified that if any procedure was to be performed, she wanted it to be done by her own physician, not by Pruitt. The trial court granted a directed verdict on the assault and battery cause due to the statute of limitations and submitted the other causes of action to the jury which returned a verdict in favor of Tisdale for $5,000 in actual damages plus $25,000 in punitive damages. Pruitt appealed the verdict claiming that the jury should have been instructed on the law of implied consent, which he believed Tisdale gave by remaining silent prior to and during the D & C procedure.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Littlejohn, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

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 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.

  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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 168,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 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.