Legal Opinion

Lounsbury v. Capel

Court of Appeals of Utah

Decided July 17, 1992No. 910584-CAPublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ORME, Judge:

Plaintiff, Michel Lounsbury, sought to recover damages from defendant, Dr. Neal Capel, alleging that Dr. Capel performed surgery on him without his consent. At trial, a jury was impaneled and heard opening statements. However, the parties at that point agreed that, prior to presenting their respective cases to the jury, they would present their evidence to the court by proffer, and ask the court to rule on what amounted to a motion for directed verdict following the proffers. It is clear from the proffers that several factual issues were vigorously contested. Nevertheless,…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. Schloendorff v. Society of the New York HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1914
  2. Cobbs v. GrantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  3. Bing v. ThunigNew York Court of Appeals · 1957
  4. State v. BishopUtah Supreme Court · 1988
  5. State v. WoodUtah Supreme Court · 1982

34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Mrs. Verdie Mae Franklin Verdie Mae Franklin, Administratrix of the Estate of Lonnie B. Franklin v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1993
  2. Vitale v. HencheyKentucky Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Wuerz v. HuffakerMissouri Court of Appeals · 2001
  4. Krauss v. Utah State Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1993
  5. Mole v. JuttonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2004

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API