The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Tiesenga (D) operated on Walski (P) to remove P's thyroid. There was a great deal of scar tissue present, and D made a wide cut to avoid where the thought the laryngeal nerve to be. D cut P's vocal nerves, and P's vocal chords were paralyzed. The trial court directed a verdict for D after P failed to establish the standard of care as her doctor testified that in his opinion D should have located the nerve before cutting. The appellate court affirmed. P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.