Legal Opinion

Morrill v. Tegarden

Nebraska Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1886PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Error to the district court of Merrick county. Tried below before Post, J.

1Opinion of the CourtReese, J.

At the commencement of the trial of this cause in the district court plaintiff in error objected to the introduction of any testimony, for the reason that the petition was insufficient and did not state a cause of action. The objection was overruled, to which plaintiff in error excepted, and now assigns said ruling as error.

The action was for damages resulting from alleged malpractice in reducing and treating a fractured limb. The petition alleges the fracture, employment of plaintiff in error (defendant below), the undertaking on his part, the carelessness, negligence, and unskillfulness…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. H. W. Curtis & Co. v. CutlerNebraska Supreme Court · 1878
  2. O'Hara v. WellsNebraska Supreme Court · 1883

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hoffman v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Burgo v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Landis & Schick v. WattsNebraska Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Landis & Schick v. WattsNebraska Supreme Court · 1908

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API