603 Pa. 430
984 A.2d 935
Decided November 24, 2009
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · decided 2009-11-24
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently September 2012
4 state decisions
Key passage — most relied on by later courts
“Whether, for purposes of determining professional negligence, a general practitioner who provides mental health treatment to a patient is held to the same higher duty as a specialist in psychiatry or psychology?”
quoted by 1 later decision, including Thierfelder v. Wolfert
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 2009-11-24
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1 ORDER
¶2 AND NOW, this 24th day of November 2009, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue, rephrased for clarity, is:
Whether, for purposes of determining professional negligence, a general practitioner who provides mental health treatment to a patient is held to the same higher duty as a specialist in psychiatry or psychology?