Legal Opinion

Dietzel v. Gurman

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 10, 2002PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION BY

FORD ELLIOTT, J.:

¶ 1 In this appeal, we are asked to decide whether the trial court erred when it refused to remove a compulsory nonsuit entered at the close of appellant Shirley Dietzel’s (“patient’s”) case-in-chief. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. The factual and procedural history of the case follows.

¶2 On January 28, 1997, appellee Andrew Gurman, M.D. (“physician”) performed hip replacement surgery on patient during which she suffered an injury to her sciatic nerve. Physician conceded that the injury occurred during the surgery, and also acknowledged that he did not…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Corrado v. Thomas Jefferson University HospitalSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  2. Hong v. PelagattiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
  3. Stack v. WapnerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
  4. Kelly v. St. Mary HospitalSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  5. Harnish v. School Dist. of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1999

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Rachlin v. EdmisonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  2. Barnes, D. v. ALCOA, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  3. Casper, D. v. Halstead, S.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
  4. Online Auctions v. Brimar EnterprisesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
  5. Phillips, S. v. Gilbert, B.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2020

2 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