Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts Keyed to Twerski
Helling v. Carey
Citation:519 P.2d 981 (Wash. 1974)
ProfessorMelissa A. Hale
CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"
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.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- 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:
Barbara Helling (Plaintiff) first visited Dr. Thomas Carey and Dr. Robert Laughlin (Defendants) in 1959 concerning her eyesight. She was fitted with contact lenses but returned numerous times over the next nine years complaining about irritation in her eyes. In 1968, the Defendants conducted an eye pressure test for the first time, and discovered Plaintiff suffered from glaucoma. Plaintiff was thirty-two at this time. Plaintiff sued Defendants, alleging that their failure to conduct a pressure test was negligence resulting in her near total loss of vision. The Defendants argue that in their profession, routine eye pressure tests are not standard care for people under the age of forty.
- 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.