Edelman v. McDonell
California Supreme Court
The hill of particulars was authenticated hy the certificate ■&i the judge, that it was "the only bill of particulars filed in the xcase.” Further facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtTemple, J.
—This action was brought upon a medical hill for services rendered by Dr. Edelman and Dr. Lasher in the treatment of defendant, W. F. McDonell.
All material allegations of the complaint are denied and the court finds in effect that A. A. McDonell is the father of the ■other defendant, who was, however, not a minor when the medical services •commenced.
It is foun'd that the services consisted of divers consultations, house visits, office visits, surgical operations, and surgical dressings extending over a period of six months, and were rendered in pursuance to the request of W. F. McDonell, made…
2Cited by11 opinions
- McClenahan v. KeyesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
- Morrell v. LawrenceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- Elmore v. TingleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
- Silva v. LinnemanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Bedell v. MashburnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.