People ex rel. Deuel v. Shaw
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Order affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. Memorandum: We think that the court should have instructed the physician, who had treated defendant and whom defendant called as a witness, to *978answer certain questions which the physician had refused to answer upon the ground that he had not received compensation to testify as an expert. A physician, when subpoenaed, must attend court and may be required to testify to what he knows. “ As to any fact within the knowledge of a professional witness, he stands upon an equality with every other witness. But it is well settled that a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Mount v. WelshOregon Supreme Court · 1926
3Cited by4 opinions
- People Ex Rel. Kraushaar Bros. & Co. v. ThorpeNew York Court of Appeals · 1947
- In Re the Estate of RothkoNew York Surrogate's Court · 1974
- McDermott v. Manhattan Eye, Ear & Throat HospitalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962
- In re the Estate of StevensNew York Surrogate's Court · 1965