Canterbury v. Spence
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
464 F.2d 772 (D.C. Cir. 1972)
Nineteen-year-old Canterbury (plaintiff) underwent a laminectomy recommended by neurosurgeon Dr. Spence (defendant) after experiencing severe back pain; Spence told Canterbury's mother by phone that the operation was no more serious "than any other operation" and never disclosed the specific risk of paralysis, and Canterbury's mother signed a consent form after the procedure. After the surgery, Canterbury fell from his hospital bed and became paralyzed from the waist down, requiring a second surgery that only partially restored function, leaving him with long-term incontinence and bladder paralysis; Canterbury sued for medical malpractice, and the district court granted directed verdicts for Spence and the hospital for lack of medical evidence of negligence, prompting his appeal.
Whether a physician has a duty, prior to a medical procedure, to disclose all risks that a reasonable person in the patient's position would find significant in deciding whether to undergo that specific procedure.