Legal Opinion
Alberts v. Schultz
New Mexico Supreme Court
Decided February 25, 1999No. 24936PublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FRANCHINI, Chief J.
{1} Dee and Mildred Aberts, husband and wife, brought a medical malpractice action for the amputation of Dee’s right leg below the knee. The trial court certified the following question for interlocutory appeal: “Should New Mexico recognize a cause of action for the increased risk of harm to a patient as a result of a physician’s negligence, and if so, should this doctrine apply to the facts of this case[?]” Alberts v. Schultz, No. CV 95-008040, slip op. at 2 (N.M.District.Ct. Feb. 17, 1997). We do not believe this theory of recovery — to which we apply the terms…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Hamil v. BashlineSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1978
- Pfiffner v. CorreaSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1994
- Martin v. East Jefferson General Hosp.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1991
- Scott v. RizzoNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1981
- McKellips v. Saint Francis Hospital, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1987
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Beverly Haceesa, Individually, and First Financial Trust Company, as Conservator for Shenoel Haceesa, a Minor v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2002
- Matsuyama v. BirnbaumMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2008
- Talbott v. Roswell Hospital Corp.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 2005
- Rimbert v. Eli Lilly and Co.District Court, D. New Mexico · 2008
- Blea v. FieldsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 2005
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.