Korman v. Mallin, 858 P.2d 1145 (1993) p108.

P had breast reduction surgery. Was never warned personally by the physician of risk of scarring. She did admit she read it when she signed the consent forms. She went through with the surgery and ended up with lots of scars.

Was the D negligent in failing to obtain D’s informed consent to the surgery?

Scope of disclosure required under the statute must be measured by what a reasonable patient would need to know in order to make an informed and intelligent decision about the proposed treatment.

D did not satisfy his duty of disclosure as a matter of law and is therefore negligent.

Scarring was discussed in office visits, a informational video, pamphlets, and consent forms. However, merely identifying the risk does not necessarily provide the patient with the information necessary for an informed decision. Conclude it is a factual question whether D’s explanation of the scarring risk was adequate to allow a reasonable patient to make an informed and intelligent decision whether to undergo the procedure.