Health Law Keyed to Furrow
Strasel v. Seven Hills OB-GYN Associates, Inc.
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
- Topic: Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
- Parties: Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
- Procedural Posture & History: Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises: Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
- Brief Facts: A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
- Rule of Law: Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
- Facts: What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case. Review the Facts of this case here:
Christina Strasel (Plaintiff), who was obese, went to an initial pregnancy appointment at Seven Hills OB-GYN Associates (Defendant). A sonogram revealed a sac in her uterus, but the sonographer was not able to detect a heartbeat or a fetal pole. In her report, the sonographer stated that she suspected a blighted ovum, which is a condition where an empty placental sac develops in the uterus without a fetus, but the sonographer's ability to see was limited by Plaintiff's obesity. She recommended a follow-up sonogram. Plaintiff's medical file was given to Dr. Xavier G. Ortiz (Defendant), who diagnosed Plaintiff with a blighted ovum. Dr. Ortiz (Defendant) did not examine Plaintiff, but he did schedule a D&C procedure for Plaintiff. Several weeks after the procedure, Plaintiff believed she was still pregnant and made an appointment at Seven Hills (Defendant). Her blood test was positive and she was given another sonogram. The sonographer told Plaintiff that she was 13 weeks pregnant. Dr. Ortiz (Defendant) then told Plaintiff that he had misdiagnosed her viable pregnancy as a blighted ovum, and that her baby might suffer problems resulting from the D&C. Plaintiff then learned that the possible problems were severe. She worried about her unborn baby constantly throughout her pregnancy, withdrew from her other children, and separated from her husband. She did give birth to a healthy baby girl, but she continued to worry about the possibility of neurological diseases that could still occur. Plaintiff was diagnosed as having a major depressive disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of the D&C and the uncertainty of how it would affect her daughter. Plaintiff and her husband then sued for malpractice and negligent infliction of emotional distress, and requested punitive damages. She was awarded $210,000.00 at arbitration. Defendants Ortiz and Seven Hills appealed the arbitration award. A jury then returned a verdict of $372,000.00 in Plaintiff's favor, but against Plaintiff's husband. Plaintiff then filed a motion for prejudgment interest, which was denied by the trial court.
- Issue(s): Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
- Holding: Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
- Concurring / Dissenting Opinions: Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
- Reasoning and Analysis: Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.