Walski v. Tiesenga
Supreme Court of Illinois
381 N.E.2d 279 (1978)
During a thyroidectomy, Dr. Tiesenga (defendant) chose to predict the location of Walski's (plaintiff) laryngeal nerves rather than surgically locate them first, given the added danger that identification posed from her prior surgeries, and the resulting cut damaged the nerves; Walski's expert testified only that his own personal custom was to locate the nerves before cutting, without describing any generally accepted professional standard, while Tiesenga testified that although identification is customary, it would have been unwise given Walski's surgical history. The trial court directed a verdict for Tiesenga, affirmed on appeal, and Walski sought further review.
Whether a plaintiff in a medical malpractice case must establish a generally accepted standard of care by which to measure the defendant physician's conduct through expert testimony.