Legal Opinion

Arena v. Gingrich

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided January 12, 1988No. TC A8306-03487; CA A36593; SC S33932, S33935PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLinde, J.

Defendant Gingrich, a surgeon, operated on plaintiff to correct a hiatal hernia. Before doing so, he explained to plaintiff two alternative procedures for repairing such a hernia by wrapping and suturing a portion of the stomach to the esophagus. In fact, however, he eventually employed a third procedure, which entailed implanting in the patient an artificial device known as an Angelchik ring. Plaintiff sued for damages, alleging physiological and psychic injuries and claims for relief separately identified in the complaint as “negligence” and “battery.” A jury decided against plaintiff on…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Cobbs v. GrantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Stewart v. Jefferson Plywood CompanyOregon Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Getchell v. MansfieldOregon Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Mayor v. DowsettOregon Supreme Court · 1965
  5. Turman v. Central Billing Bureau, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1977

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Gaston v. ParsonsOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Hondroulis v. SchuhmacherSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1989
  3. State v. RamozOregon Supreme Court · 2021
  4. Migis v. Autozone, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  5. Edward D. Jones & Co. v. MishlerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999

15 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