Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts Keyed to Christie
Ashe v. Radiation Oncology Associates
Citation:9 S.W.3d 119 (Tenn. 1999)
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:
Patricia Ashe (plaintiff) underwent a double mastectomy and chemotherapy for breast cancer, and a few years later had a portion of her lung removed because of a tumor. The plaintiff was referred to Dr. Steven Stroup (defendant) who recommended radiation therapy but failed to tell the plaintiff the radiation may cause an injury to her spinal cord. As a result of the radiation, she became a paraplegic. The plaintiff sued the defendant for failure to obtain informed consent and medical malpractice. At trial, the plaintiff presented expert testimony that the applicable standard of care required a doctor to advise the patient of this risk, even if the risk was 1 to 2 percent. The plaintiff also offered conflicting testimony as to whether she would or would not have consented to surgery had she known the risk.
- 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.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
- Policy: Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.
- Court Direction: Shares where the Court went from here for this case.