Legal Opinion

Linn v. Piersol

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 7, 1918No. Civ. No. 2394PublishedCited by 9 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

ZOOK, J., pro tem.

In this action, defendant, a physician, appeals from a judgment in favor of plaintiff, Anna Linn, in an action for his alleged malpractice. His main point on this appeal is that there was no showing of negligence on his part sufficient to warrant sending the case to the jury, and that, therefore, -either his motion for nonsuit or his motion for a directed verdict should have been granted.

Respondents contend that this point cannot be - considered because the appeal was taken more than sixty days after the entry of the judgment. The case is one where the statute abolishing the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. McGraw v. KerrColorado Court of Appeals · 1912
  2. Houghton v. DicksonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916
  3. Foreman v. Hunter Lumber Co.California Court of Appeal · 1918
  4. Nathan v. PorterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918
  5. Lowell v. LowellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Sinz v. OwensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Donahoo v. LovasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  3. Smith v. BeardWyoming Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Blankenship v. Baptist Memorial HospitalCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1942
  5. Callahan v. Hahnemann HospitalCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934

4 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