Legal Opinion
Stickney v. Congdon
Washington Supreme Court
Decided October 27, 1926No. 19879. Department OnePublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBridges, J.
— By this action the plaintiff sought damages because of an X-ray burn.
The defendant, Bussell T. Congdon, is a physician and surgeon practicing at the city of Wenatchee. There have already been two trials of this case before a jury. In each instance, there was a verdict for the defendants. In the first instance, the trial court refused to grant a new trial, and the plaintiff appealed therefrom to this court. See Stickney v. Congdon, 131 Wash. 7, 228 Pac. 819. On that appeal we gave the plaintiff a new trial. After the second verdict, the trial court (being a judge other than the one who sat…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Brown v. City of Walla WallaWashington Supreme Court · 1913
- Clark v. Great Northern Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1905
- Rotting v. ClemanWashington Supreme Court · 1895
- Fobes Supply Co. v. KendrickWashington Supreme Court · 1915
- Alberts v. Rasher, Kingman, HerrinWashington Supreme Court · 1924
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Brammer v. LappenbuschWashington Supreme Court · 1934
- State v. BrentWashington Supreme Court · 1948
- Stevich v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 1935
- Field v. North Coast Transportation Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1932
- Pylate v. HadmanWashington Supreme Court · 1929
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.