Legal Opinion
Ross v. McDaniel
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Decided April 3, 1972No. 5-5804PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
George Rose Smith, Justice.
This is an action for malpractice brought by the appellees, Dora H. McDaniel and her husband, against Dr. Ross. In the trial court Dr. Ross moved for a summary judgment, on the ground that the suit is barred by the two-year statute of limitations. Ark. Stat. Ann. § 37-205 (Repl. 1962). The trial judge denied the motion, holding the statute to be unconstitutional insofar as it denied a remedy to the plaintiffs. Counsel for Dr. Ross perfected an appeal as a precautionary measure, to guard against the possibility that the trial court’s order might be held to be…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Widmer v. Fort Smith Vehicle & MacHinery Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1968
- State v. Greenville Stone & Gravel Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
- Wright v. City of Little RockSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1968
3Cited by3 opinions
- Life & Casualty Insurance Co. of Tennessee v. GilkeySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1974
- Bawcom v. Allis-Chalmers Credit Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1974
- Banquet Foods v. McGlothinCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1988