Truman v. Thomas
California Supreme Court
611 P.2d 902 (1980)
- Written by Elliot Stern, JD
Facts
Rena Truman was a patient of Dr. Claude Thomas (defendant) for six years. Thomas never performed a pap smear on Truman and medical records contained no reference to a recommendation that Truman undergo a pap smear. In 1970, Truman died from an inoperable cancerous tumor in her cervix. Truman’s children (plaintiffs) brought a wrongful-death lawsuit against Thomas, alleging that Thomas’s failure to inform Truman of the risks of not undergoing a pap smear had led to Truman’s death. Truman’s children presented expert testimony stating that if Truman had undergone a pap smear, the tumor would likely have been discovered in time to save Truman’s life. Thomas testified that although he had not specifically informed Truman of the risks of not undergoing a pap smear, he had regularly informed her of the need for a pap smear. Thomas also testified that he had twice offered to perform the procedure and defer the cost, but Truman refused on account of the cost and because she didn’t feel like having the test performed. Truman’s children asked the court to instruct the jury that the failure of a physician to disclose to a patient the risks of refusing a test could make the physician liable if a reasonably prudent patient would not have refused the test had the patient been adequately informed of the risks of refusal. The judge refused the jury instruction. The jury found for Thomas. Truman’s children appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Bird, C.J.)
Dissent (Clark, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.