Jambazian

Jambazian v. Borden

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 580·25 Cal. App. 4th 836·30 Cal. Rptr. 2d 768·30 Cal. Rptr. 768·94 Daily Journal DAR 7821
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 7, 1994B077655California5,088 words

Opinion

Opinion

Turner, J.

I. Introduction

Plaintiff, Harry Jambazian, appeals from a summary judgment in favor of defendant, Joseph Borden, D.P.M., on a complaint for medical malpractice. We conclude plaintiffs failure to present legally admissible opinion testimony to controvert that submitted by defendant warranted summary judgment be granted on the medical negligence and informed consent claims. In so concluding, we determine that plaintiff had a responsibility to present opinion testimony that he suffered from diabetes by a properly qualified medical witness in his summary judgment opposition to controvert defense evidence that he had no diabetic condition. Further, plaintiff had a duty to present properly qualified medical opinion evidence that his alleged diabetic condition created surgical risks other than those related by defendant prior to the procedure. This is because the existence of a diabetic condition was a factual predicate of plaintiffs claim he was not properly informed of the effect of surgery because he had diabetes. We affirm.

II. Background

The complaint sought damages for causes of action for negligence (first) and lack of informed consent (second) for injuries plaintiff…

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.