Smith v. Stump
Indiana Court of Appeals
From the Huntington Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the Court
Gavin, J. —
The appellee recovered judgment for damages for malpractice in setting and treating a broken arm, whereby the power of pronation and supination was impaired.
Appellant here asserts that his motion, for a new trial should have been sustained. It is earnestly argued that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict for appellee.
Appellant certainly did not undertake absolutely to cure appellee, but he was bound, as his attending physician and surgeon, to possess and exercise the average *360degree of skill and care possessed and exercised by members of his profession practicing in…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Christy v. HolmesIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
- Heltonville Manufacturing Co. v. FieldsIndiana Supreme Court · 1894
- Gramm v. BoenerIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
- Kelley v. KelleyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1893
- Becknell v. HosierIndiana Court of Appeals · 1894
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Bailey v. KainIndiana Court of Appeals · 1963
- Baker v. HancockIndiana Court of Appeals · 1902
- Thomas v. DabblemontIndiana Court of Appeals · 1903
- White v. BardachIndiana Court of Appeals · 1968
- Watts v. MoffettIndiana Court of Appeals · 1895
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.