Assertion: sard's testimony | /r/HasProperty | necessary
Facets:
value: to establish this aspect of materiality
type: PURPOSE
Source sentences:
text: Where patient sued physician claiming that he negligently failed to advise that surgical sterilization procedure was not absolutely certain to succeed and failed to apprise patient of risks and alternatives of tubal ligation, thereby precluding patient from giving informed consent, the Court held 1) that expert medical testimony need not be produced by the patient to establish the existence of a duty to disclose and a departure from the standard of care, but 2) that expert medical testimony would be necessary to show the various alternative methods of sterilization available; and the nature and risks of the sterilization procedure employed and alternatives thereto.
text: Simply stated, our reading of the prior cases, as set forth above, does not support this statement and, to the contrary, leads us to conclude that expert medical testimony is necessary to establish whether a physician's disclosure of risks comports with what a reasonably prudent physician would have disclosed.
text: We therefore hold that, except in those cases where deviation from the standard of care is a matter commonly known by lay persons, expert medical testimony is necessary to establish whether a physician has or has not complied with the standard of a reasonably prudent physician.
text: Some" expert testimony is necessary to establish this aspect of materiality because only a physician or other qualified expert is capable of judging what risk exists and the likelihood of its occurrence.