Legal Opinion

Rising v. Veatch

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 7, 1931No. Docket No. 7590PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DOOLING, J., pro tem.

In this action for malpractice respondents recovered judgment against appellant, a dentist. The case was tried before a jury. In the course of the examination of respondent, Ethel Rising, she was asked by her counsel to relate a certain conversation with appellant. Over repeated objections of appellant’s counsel the following testimony was given: “In regard to reimbursing us for the doctor bills—■ . . . Reimburse us for the expenses of the doctors; that it was out of his hands, and would have to be handled through his insurance.”

Counsel for appellant immediately assigned…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Barham v. WidingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Brewer v. RingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
  3. Lahti v. McMenaminCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Patterson v. MarcusCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Schumacher v. Murray HospitalMontana Supreme Court · 1920

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Royal Globe Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Huffman v. LindquistCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  3. Boyce v. BrownArizona Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Stacy v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1934
  5. Theobald v. ByersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961

21 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