How have courts interpreted the doctrine of "peculiar" or "special risk" in medical malpractice cases?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from BOWMAN v. WYATT, B207468, No. BC329390 (Cal. App. 2010):

inherent risk of injury to others, which is commonly referred to as the doctrine of "peculiar" or "special" risk. (Privette v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal.4th 689, 693.)

Other Questions


How have courts interpreted the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur in medical malpractice cases where an operation has failed to produce the expected result? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the doctrine of sovereign immunity in a medical malpractice case? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the doctrine of strict products liability in medical malpractice cases? (California, United States of America)
How has the court interpreted the doctrine of negligent misrepresentation in a medical malpractice case? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the doctrine of self-defense in cases that address other legal doctrines? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the doctrine of common law in the context of medical malpractice? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted findings of fact and conclusions of law in a medical malpractice case? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted a burden-shifting instruction in a medical malpractice case? (California, United States of America)
How has section 855.4 of the California Medical Code been interpreted in the context of medical malpractice cases? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted section 1016.5 of the California Immigration Code and how have the courts interpreted the word 'court' in that section? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.