Young v. Liddington
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtOtt, J.
This is a malpractice action. The complaint alleged that the defendant doctor negligently and erroneously diagnosed, and failed to treat properly, a child’s illness, which negligence was the proximate cause of the injury and damage. From a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, the doctor has appealed.
In view of the questions involved in this appeal and the disposition which we make of them, it is not necessary for us to state the facts except in so far as such discussion is necessary to an understanding of the legal issues involved.
The first assignment of error relates to the reading of a part…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- McGowan v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
- Cantrill v. American Mail Line, Ltd.Washington Supreme Court · 1953
- Berndt v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 1954
- Johnson v. LangleyCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1933
- Meier v. PaulusWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- State v. KreckWashington Supreme Court · 1975
- In Re Welfare of JMCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2005
- In re the Welfare of J.M.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2005
- Blankenship v. MyersIdaho Supreme Court · 1975
- Tennant v. RoysCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1986
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.