STANDARD OF CARE
How the law now defines reasonable care, and how fetal weight estimation has been judged in court.
2024
In May 2024 the American Law Institute approved its first Restatement (Third) of Torts: Medical Malpractice. It moves the standard of care from prevailing custom toward reasonable care, judged on the evidence. Custom still counts. Evidence can outweigh it.1
1974
The Washington Supreme Court held physicians liable for not giving a simple, available test that professional custom did not require. The test was inexpensive and harmless, and it could have prevented serious injury. A whole profession not using it was no defense.2
2025
A federal court held that reasonable care means accounting for a 20 percent margin of error in estimated fetal weight, and that professional guidelines do not set the ceiling. Applied to a 4,200-gram estimate, the margin reached about 5,040 grams, past the point at which cesarean delivery should be considered. The court judged each provider against the estimate available at the time.3
IN COURT
Manning v. Pecos Valley of New Mexico
New Mexico, 2018. Fetal weight underestimated; the defense’s own experts called the care “indefensible.”
$73M
Swanson v. Northern Westchester Hospital Center
New York, 2009. Brachial plexus injury from shoulder dystocia.
$56M
Zhao v. United States
Southern District of Illinois, 2019.
$8.3M
Rodriguez v. Yale-New Haven Health
Connecticut, 2023.
$6.5M
Klutschkowski v. PeaceHealth
Oregon, 2011.
$1.9M
A summary of published holdings and verdicts, not legal advice. Growth Intelligence is not an FDA-cleared device; it is clinical decision support under the CDS exemption.