Legal Opinion

Cassano v. Hagstrom

New York Court of Appeals

Decided April 17, 1959PublishedCited by 144 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDesmond, J.

The trial court correctly dismissed the complaint since there was no proof in the record that any negligent act of defendant caused the nerve injury. Plaintiff’s whole theory of action was that defendant had negligently severed the two nerves in question by improperly allowing his drill to penetrate the lingual periosteum which lies between the extracted tooth and these two nerves. However, the only testimony on this subject was given by defendant himself and he swore not only that he did not cut these nerves but that he did his work on the other side of the tooth, that is, between the gum…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. People v. . PatrickNew York Court of Appeals · 1905
  2. Marx v. Ontario Beach Hotel & Amusement Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1914
  3. Weibert v. . HananNew York Court of Appeals · 1911

3Cited by144 opinions

  1. Hambsch v. New York City Transit AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
  2. Lipsius v. WhiteAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
  3. Roques v. NobleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
  4. Mertsaris v. 73rd Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  5. Santoni v. Bertelsmann Property, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005

139 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