Legal Opinion

Heitz v. Carroll

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided February 27, 1990No. 17355PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BAKES, Chief Justice.

Plaintiffs/respondents sued defendants/appellants to recover for medical malpractice and for the wrongful death of Mary Heitz. The case was tried, and the jury rendered a verdict for defendants. Plaintiffs then moved for a j.n.o.v. or, in the alternative, for a new trial. The j.n.o.v. motion was denied, but the new trial motion was granted. Defendants appeal the grant of a new trial, alleging, inter alia, that the trial court’s post-verdict rulings regarding the special verdict form were legally erroneous. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

I

Mary Heitz had been…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Blaine v. ByersIdaho Supreme Court · 1967
  2. Sanchez v. GaleyIdaho Supreme Court · 1987
  3. M. K. Transport, Inc. v. GroverIdaho Supreme Court · 1980
  4. McBride v. Ford Motor Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Idaho Gold Dredging Corp. v. Boise Payette Lumber Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1933

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Weinstein v. Prudential Property & Casualty InsuranceIdaho Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Lanham v. Idaho Power Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Mosell Equities, LLC v. Berryhill & Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 2013
  4. City of McCall v. SeubertIdaho Supreme Court · 2006
  5. Hudelson v. Delta International MacHinery Corp.Idaho Supreme Court · 2005

29 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