Lufkin v. Harvey
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Action in the municipal court of St. Paul to recover $223 for medical and surgical services rendered defendants’ minor son. The case was tried before Hanft, J., who granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the action. From an order denying his motion for a new trial, plaintiff appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
Hallam:, J.
Late one night, plaintiff, a physician and surgeon, was called to a hospital in St. Paul, by some person unknown to him, to attend the minor son of defendants. The son had received an injury, and an immediate operation was necessary. Plaintiff performed the operation with the acquiescence of the defendants. He continued to treat the son for a period of nine months, and during that time performed a second operation, all with the knowledge and assent of defendants. The evidence shows that the treatment given was necessary for the health and welfare of the boy. The value of…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Plummer v. MoldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1875
- Kinzel v. Boston & Duluth Farm Land Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
- Theodore Wetmore & Co. v. ThurmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
- Ecker v. IsaacsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Wills v. WillsIndiana Supreme Court · 1870
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Lufkin v. HarveySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
- Schimmelpfennig v. GaedkeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1947
- Medlinsky v. Premium Cut Beef Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
- Meyer v. SaterbakSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
- Kruta v. LoughSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.