Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Fuller v. Starnes

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 21, 1980No. 79-334Published

1ConcurrenceJohn A. Fogleman, Chief Justice

I respectfully concur in the affirmance in this case, but for an entirely different reason from that given by the majority.

I think the trial court properly excluded the proffered testimony of the two daughters of Maggie Long in response to the following question:

Knowing your mother as well as a daughter could know her, do you think your mother in her right mind would have consented had she known the risks involved with Demerol?

A proffer was made to the effect that each would have answered that, in her opinion, her mother would not have consented, if informed of the risk of Demerol concerning…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Wilkinson v. VeseySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1972
  2. Poulin v. ZartmanAlaska Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Shetter v. RochelleCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1965
  4. Beauvais v. Notre Dame HospitalSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1978
  5. Shetter v. RochelleCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1966

3 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