Macy v. Blatchford

The full case caption appears at the end of this opinion.

In this medical malpractice action, plaintiffs Danita and Lawrence Macy challenge a trial court ruling that prevented them from introducing evidence at trial that Dr.Blatchford (defendant) had a sexual relationship with Danita Macy [FOOTNOTE 1] at the time when the Macys assert that he negligently treated her for persistent and debilitatingpelvic pain. The Court of Appeals affirmed that ruling, specifically holding that the trial court did not err in granting defendant’s motion in limine to exclude anyevidence that he and Macy had a relationship of that kind. Macy v. Blatchford, 154 Or App 313, 329, 961 P2d 873 (1998). The Macys sought review by thiscourt, and we allowed their petition to consider whether and how evidence of a sexual relationship might be relevant to a claim that a physician’s treatment of apatient was negligent. We conclude that such evidence is relevant to one of the Macys’ allegations, viz., that defendant was negligent in failing to obtain Macy’sinformed consent to recommended surgery. We therefore reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals on that ground.