Salasguevara

Salasguevara v. Frye

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 7·31 Cal. App. 4th 330·37 Cal. Rptr. 2d 40·95 Daily Journal DAR 338·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 213
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 5, 1995D016780California3,805 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nares, J.

Question Presented

The proper standard of care for a person administering a diphtheria, pertussis and tetanus (DPT) vaccine to an infant is the sole legal question in this appeal. Trying the case without a jury, the court entered judgment in favor of Frederick Frye, M.D., in the medical malpractice action of Jaridijon Salasguevara, a minor by his guardian ad litem, arising from Frye’s administration of DPT shots beginning when Dijon was one week short of four months old. The court applied a standard of care under Health and Safety Code section 429.36, relating to liability for administering an immunizing agent to a minor, requiring the plaintiff to prove gross negligence or willful misconduct where the immunization is required by state law. On appeal Dijon contends ordinary negligence principles should apply with the result we should enter judgment for him on the basis of the trial court’s statement Frye breached the ordinary standard of care for physicians. We affirm.

Factual Background

Dijon was bom September 24, 1980. His birth and initial development were normal. His mother routinely took Dijon to his pediatricians, Frye and Ronald G. Lehman, M.D., for well baby…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.