In ''Osborn v. Irwin Memorial Blood Bank'', 5 Cal.App.4th 234 (1992), the

Court of Appeals of California The California Courts of Appeal are the state intermediate appellate courts in the U.S. state of California. The state is geographically divided along county lines into six appellate districts.

considered certain questions pertaining to whether a

blood bank A blood bank is a center where blood gathered as a result of blood donation is stored and preserved for later use in blood transfusion. The term "blood bank" typically refers to a department of a hospital usually within a Clinical Pathology laborat ...

could be held liable for

negligence Negligence (Lat. ''negligentia'') is a failure to exercise appropriate and/or ethical ruled care expected to be exercised amongst specified circumstances. The area of tort law known as ''negligence'' involves harm caused by failing to act as a ...

or negligent misrepresentation after a patient contracted

HIV/AIDS Human immunodeficiency virus infection and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) is a spectrum of conditions caused by infection with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), a retrovirus. Following initial infection an individual ...

as a result of a

blood transfusion Blood transfusion is the process of transferring blood products into a person's circulation intravenously. Transfusions are used for various medical conditions to replace lost components of the blood. Early transfusions used whole blood, but mo ...

Factual background

In 1983, Michael Osborn, an infant, underwent surgery to repair a

congenital heart defect A congenital heart defect (CHD), also known as a congenital heart anomaly and congenital heart disease, is a defect in the structure of the heart or great vessels that is present at birth. A congenital heart defect is classed as a cardiovascul ...

. During that surgery, Osborn received a blood transfusion. At the time of the transfusion, donated blood was not routinely tested for

human immunodeficiency virus The human immunodeficiency viruses (HIV) are two species of ''Lentivirus'' (a subgroup of retrovirus) that infect humans. Over time, they cause acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), a condition in which progressive failure of the immun ...

, because the cause of AIDS had not definitively been identified yet. Fearing that AIDS could be transmitted by blood, the Osborns had requested to make directed blood donations specifically earmarked for use by Michael. They first contacted the surgeon, who informed them that they needed to contact the blood bank. The receptionist at the blood bank, however, said that directed donations were not allowed, and so the surgery proceeded using blood from the public supply. He subsequently was diagnosed with acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS).

The trial

The patient and his family sued the University of California (where the surgery occurred) and the Irwin Memorial Blood Bank (which supplied the blood) for multiple

causes of action A cause of action or right of action, in law, is a set of facts sufficient to justify suing to obtain money or property, or to justify the enforcement of a legal right against another party. The term also refers to the legal theory upon which a p ...

. A jury trial took place. The blood bank introduced evidence that its safety procedures were at least as good as those generally prevailing at the time. The blood bank also sought to introduce evidence that, because the patient was type A negative, he could not receive any donations from members of his family, as a result of which only a small amount of blood (or no blood at all) would have been able to be provided by means of directed donation, but the judge did not allow defendants to present this evidence to the jury. At the conclusion of the evidence the trial judge granted the defendants' motions for

nonsuit A non-suit (British English) or nonsuit (American English) is a legal procedure. A plaintiff (or other person bringing a civil action, such as a petitioner) drops his or her suit, under certain circumstances that do not prevent another action being ...

on several of the causes of action, and directed a verdict in favor of the university on the remaining causes of action. Thus, only the blood bank remained as a defendant, and the following questions were submitted to the jury: * Was the blood bank

negligent Negligence (Lat. ''negligentia'') is a failure to exercise appropriate and/or ethical ruled care expected to be exercised amongst specified circumstances. The area of tort law known as ''negligence'' involves harm caused by failing to act as a ...

? * Did the blood bank commit the tort of intentional misrepresentation when the receptionist stated that directed blood donations were not allowed? * Did the blood bank commit the tort of negligent

misrepresentation In common law jurisdictions, a misrepresentation is a false or misleading '' R v Kylsant'' 931/ref> statement of fact made during negotiations by one party to another, the statement then inducing that other party to enter into a contract. The ...

when the receptionist stated that directed blood donations were not allowed? The jury returned a general verdict in favor of the plaintiffs and awarded them a total of $750,000. The blood bank moved for

judgment notwithstanding the verdict Judgment notwithstanding the verdict, also called judgment ''non obstante veredicto'', or JNOV, is a type of judgment as a matter of law that is sometimes rendered at the conclusion of a jury trial. In U.S. federal civil court cases, the term has b ...

and also moved for an amended judgment on the grounds that the damages awarded were in excess of those allowed under the

Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act The Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) of 1975 was a statute enacted by the California Legislature in September 1975 (and signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown in September), which was intended to lower medical malpractice liability ...

(MICRA). The trial court acknowledged that it had erred when it had held that MICRA did not apply, and the blood bank moved for a new trial. The court granted the blood bank's motion for

as to the counts of negligence and intentional

and, conditioned on the plaintiffs' acceptance, reduced the award to $416,307. Both sides appealed.

The appeal

There were three issues on appeal: * Did the trial court err in granting

in favor of the defendant on the count of negligence? * Should there be a new trial on the count of negligent misrepresentation? **Did the trial court err in excluding evidence regarding the patient's blood type? **If the trial court erred, should it grant a new trial or grant a directed verdict in favor of the defendants? * Did the trial court err in dismissing the case against the university? The California Court of Appeals ruled in favor of defendants on the count of negligence, held that the defendants were entitled to a new trial on the issue of negligent misrepresentation, and ruled in favor of the university.

External links

Full text of the opinion of the court
on

Google Scholar Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. Released in beta in November 2004, the Google Scholar index includes ...

{{DEFAULTSORT:Osborn V. Irwin Memorial Blood Bank 1992 in California 1992 in United States case law California state case law HIV/AIDS in the United States Medical lawsuits Medical malpractice case law Transfusion medicine