Legal Opinion
Carmichael v. Reitz
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 27, 1971No. Civ. 36330PublishedCited by 124 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
AISO, J.
Plaintiff Vira Dee Mae Carmichael and her husband Richard Carmichael 1 brought this action for damages against defendants James Reitz, M.D., J. G. Dahlquist, M.D., the Harriman-Jones Medical Clinic, and G. D. Searle & Company, a corporation (hereinafter “Searle”), for pulmonary embolisms 2 and thrombophlebitis 3 allegedly caused by Dr. Reitz’s having prescribed the drug Enovid, manufactured and marketed by Searle, in treating plaintiff for endometriosis. 4
A motion for nonsuit made by defendants Dr. Reitz, Dr. Dahlquist, and the Harriman-Jones Medical Clinic upon plaintiff…
2Cases cited51 opinions
- Greenman v. Yuba Power Products, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1963
- Vandermark v. Ford Motor Co.California Supreme Court · 1964
- Gagne v. BertranCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
- Perlmutter v. Beth David HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
- Elmore v. American Motors Corp.California Supreme Court · 1969
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by124 opinions
- Washington State Physicians Insurance Exchange & Ass'n v. Fisons Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 1993
- Cobbs v. GrantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Brown v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- Hondroulis v. SchuhmacherSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1989
- MacDonald v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
119 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.