Torts and Personal Injury Law Center: Insights & Analysis: Medical Malpractice: Eades on the South Carolina Supreme Court's Refusal to Recognize the Tort of Medical Battery in Linog v. Yampolsky, 2008 S.C. LEXIS 10 (S.C. 2008)


LexisNexis Sites

	Let your voice be heard by joining the community today. Sign up.

Torts and Personal Injury Law Center
Current Focus: Federal Preemption in Drug and Device Cases

Sign on | create an account

Medical Malpractice

3/14/2008 9:51:21 PM EST

Eades on the South Carolina Supreme Court's Refusal to Recognize the Tort of Medical Battery in Linog v. Yampolsky, 2008 S.C. LEXIS 10 (S.C. 2008)

Posted by Ronald W. Eades

Professor of Law, Louis D. Brandeis School of Law, University of Louisville

In Linog v. Yampolsky, 2008 S.C. LEXIS 10 (S.C. 2008), the South Carolina Supreme Court held that South Carolina does not recognize the tort of medical battery, even in situations where plaintiffs claim they did not consent to a particular procedure. The plaintiff in a medical malpractice claim must prove negligence. The evidence must show that the health care provider departed from the recognized and generally accepted standards of care.

Subscribers can access the complete commentary on lexis.com. Additional fees may be incurred. (approx. 4 pages)

Non-subscribers may purchase the complete commentary on LexisNexis Store.

Create an account or login to post comments.

Your Resources

Your Toolbox

Our Communities

Law Center Communities