Garlock v. Cole
California Court of Appeal
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
- Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co.California Supreme Court · 1945
- Walsh v. WalshCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- California Lettuce Growers, Inc. v. Union Sugar Co.California Supreme Court · 1955
- Coyne v. KrempelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
- Huysman v. KirschCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Canifax v. Hercules Powder Co.California Court of Appeal · 1965
- Parker v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp.California Supreme Court · 1970
- Weinstock v. EisslerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
- Nelson v. GauntCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
- Avner v. Longridge EstatesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.