Four recent cases have been hailed as opening a new door to recovery by plaintiffs in medical malpractice cases brought on a theory of informed consent. The major impact of these four cases on the law of informed consent is twofold: first, the necessity of expert testimony in establishing the defendant-physician's duty of disclosure, and second, the standard to be applied in showing proximate cause. This Comment analyzes these cases to determine the effect both on plaintiffs and on the nature of informed consent litigation.

I. Introduction

II. Development of the Doctrine of Informed Consent

III. The Transitional Cases

IV. The Four Breakthrough Cases … A. Canterbury v. Spence … B. Wilkinson v. Vesey … C. Cobbs v. Grant … D. Fogal v. Genesee Hospital

V. The Effect of the Four Cases … A. Duty and Standard of Care … B. The Need for Expert Testimony … C. Determination of Proximate Cause

VI. Conclusion