Gwynn v. Duffield
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Montgomery Circuit Court. Action to recover for an injury alleged to have been sustained through the negligence of the defendants in giving the plaintiff a large -and improper dose of belladonna. There was a trial to a jury, and verdict and judgment were rendered for the plaintiff. The defendants appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.
This case is before us upon a second appeal. The former decision is reported in 61 Iowa, 61. The facts as now presented are nearly the same as before. It is not important that we should undertake to point out specially the difference. We will say, in a general way, that the evidence shows that the defendants, H. P. Duffield and S. B. Duffield, were partners in business as apothecaries; that the plaintiff went into their store and called for the extract of dandelion; that S. B. Duffield undertook to put up for him a quantity of the drug called for; that in doing so he made a mistake, and put…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hargreaves v. DeaconMichigan Supreme Court · 1872
- Severy v. NickersonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
- Morrissey v. Eastern RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
- Bush v. BrainardNew York Supreme Court · 1823
- O'Keefe v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1871
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Mann v. Des Moines Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1942
- Wilmes v. Chicago, Great Western RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
- Hill v. City of GlenwoodSupreme Court of Iowa · 1904
- Alexander v. Medical Associates ClinicSupreme Court of Iowa · 2002
- Papich v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1918
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.