Legal Opinion

Martin v. Arthur

Court of Appeals of Arkansas

Decided March 10, 1999No. CA 98-1165PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

John F. Stroud, Jr., Judge.

Adams v. Arthur, 333 Ark. 53, 969 S.W.2d 598 (1998), our state supreme court reviewed twelve medical malpractice cases regarding implantation of the product Orthoblock in cervical spine surgeries. Ortho-block is the trade name for a hydroxylapatite manufactured by Calcitek, Inc. The twelve cases arose from the trial court’s granting summary judgment and its ruling that the claims were barred by the two-year limitations period of the Arkansas Medical Malpractice Act. We recently followed the dictates of the Adams court in Johnson v. Arthur, 65 Ark. App. 220, 986…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Adams v. ArthurSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1998
  2. Chapman v. AlexanderSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1991
  3. Trantafello v. Medical Center of TarzanaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1986
  4. Riggs v. ThomasSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1984
  5. Spickes v. Medtronic, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1982

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Martin v. ArthurSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999

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

Powered by the Exa API