Rudolfo Ramirez v. United States

Bad Law
567 F.2d 854·1977 U.S. App. LEXIS 5787
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 2, 197776-2342California1,680 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kennedy, J.

The issue in this case is whether a government physician’s failure to warn of risks attendant to surgery constitutes a misrepresentation within the meaning of the Federal Tort Claims Act (the Act), so that the patient is barred from bringing suit against the United States. We consider this case en banc to reexamine our earlier decisions bearing on the question.

In July 1973, Ramirez underwent a surgical procedure called a stapedectomy, performed to alleviate a hearing problem. The procedure involves placement of a stapes prosthesis in the patient’s ear. Some time after the surgery, Ramirez began to experience vertigo and a continued loss of hearing. To eliminate the condition, Ramirez underwent surgery a second time, in October 1973. The stapes prosthesis was removed. After the second operation, it was confirmed that Ramirez suffered a sensory hearing loss caused by a granuloma, a reaction to the stapes prosthesis that occurs in a small percentage of cases. He brought suit under the Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346 , contending that failure to warn him of the risks of granuloma constituted negligence on the part of his government surgeon.

The district court, relying on our earlier…

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.