Legal Opinion

Garlock v. Cole

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 9, 1962No. Civ. 10172PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPierce, J.

Plaintiff appeals from a summary judgment for defendants in a malpractice action.

The sole question on appeal is whether any triable fact was before the trial court on the issue of the running of the one-year statute of limitations. (Code Civ. Proc., § 340, subd. 3.)

The issues framed by allegations of the complaint, substantially denied by the answers, were: That on November 27, 1957, respondent physicians so negligently injected a drug into appellant's left arm that it became permanently deformed ; that respondents knew this but appellant did not and was kept ignorant of the nature and extent…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Walsh v. WalshCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  3. California Lettuce Growers, Inc. v. Union Sugar Co.California Supreme Court · 1955
  4. Coyne v. KrempelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Huysman v. KirschCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Canifax v. Hercules Powder Co.California Court of Appeal · 1965
  2. Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp.California Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Weinstock v. EisslerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
  4. Nelson v. GauntCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
  5. Avner v. Longridge EstatesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969

10 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