Laureano-Quinones v. Nadal-Carrion, 3:15-cv-02548

Gretchen Laureano contracted Dr. Richard Nadal for breast augmentation and abdominoplasty; she signed a consent form on June 26, 2012; surgery occurred June 29, 2012.
Laureano was dissatisfied with cosmetic results and sought a revision; Dr. Nadal agreed to perform a scar revision/repositioning scheduled for June 5, 2013.
Pre-admission paperwork for the revision included multiple consent/waiver forms; Laureano refused to sign one required document and the June 5 surgery was cancelled.
Laureano sued for medical malpractice alleging (1) deviation from standard of care in performing the abdominoplasty, (2) lack of informed consent (including claim that a different operation was performed), and (3) patient abandonment when the revision was cancelled.
The court found many of Laureano’s proposed facts unsupported by record citations and limited its factual findings to properly supported items; summary judgment briefing suffered evidentiary defects.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Deviation from standard of care	Nadal deviated from acceptable abdominoplasty standards	Facts disputed; plaintiff failed to present evidence defining the standard or a clear deviation	Denied — plaintiff offered no admissible evidence establishing the standard of care or undisputed deviation
Lack of informed consent	Nadal failed to inform of possible aesthetic outcomes (e.g., two "belly buttons") and may have performed a different (partial) abdominoplasty without consent	Consent form warned results not guaranteed; factual disputes exist about what was disclosed and whether outcome was foreseeable	Denied — material factual disputes exist and plaintiff did not establish causal nexus; consent form undermines summary judgment for plaintiff
Performing a "different operation"	Nadal performed a partial rather than full abdominoplasty without consent	Theory was not adequately developed in the motion or supported by the record	Denied — insufficient briefing and evidence to decide as a matter of law
Patient abandonment	Cancellation of revision after plaintiff refused to sign a waiver constituted abandonment	Cancellation was reasonable given plaintiff’s refusal to sign; abandonment doctrine typically involves leaving a patient unattended during care	Denied — plaintiff cited no controlling authority supporting her theory and issues of reasonableness/credibility preclude summary judgment

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (summary judgment standard)
Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Prods., Inc., 530 U.S. 133 (credibility and weight are jury functions)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment and genuine issue standard)
Maldonado-Denis v. Castillo-Rodríguez, 23 F.3d 576 (1st Cir. 1994) (summary judgment review in favor of nonmovant)
Cruz Aviles v. Bella Vista Hosp., Inc., 112 F. Supp. 2d 200 (D.P.R. 2000) (informed-consent proximate-cause principle)