Legal Opinion

Ries v. Reinard

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 2, 1941No. Civ. 13016PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcCOMB, J.

From a judgment in favor of defendant after trial before the court without a jury in an action to recover damages for alleged malpractice, plaintiffs appeal.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to defendant (respondent), the essential facts are:

On December 19, 1938, plaintiff Ruth Ries consulted defendant, a physician and surgeon, relative to an itching in the region of her vagina. After taking said plaintiff’s history, defendant made a smear from the vagina, urethra, and cervix, and, after a microscopic examination of the smear (known as the methylene blue test) told plaintiff…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Engelking v. CarlsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Reed v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
  3. Matthiesen v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Lawless v. CalawayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Huffman v. LindquistCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  3. Lewis & Queen v. S. Edmondson & SonsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
  4. Waller v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1967
  5. Woods v. Pacific Greyhound LinesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949

3 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