Legal Opinion
Gould v. Winokur
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided January 12, 1968PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
98 N.J. Super. 554 (1968)
237 A.2d 916
ELMER GOULD, PLAINTIFF,
v.
GERALD WINOKUR, DEFENDANT.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division.
Decided January 12, 1968.
Mr. Seymour B. Jacobs for plaintiff (Messrs. Balk & Jacobs, attorneys).
Mr. Arthur J. Blake for defendant (Messrs. Lamb, Blake, Hutchinson & Dunne, attorneys).
PINDAR, J.S.C.
The complaint herein alleged a cause of surgical and medical malpractice in three aspects, viz., negligent performance of surgery, failure to give plaintiff adequate information to procure his full consent, and failure to tender pre- and post-operative care. At the close…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Ybarra v. SpangardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Sanzari v. RosenfeldSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1961
- Siverson v. WeberCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- Menth v. Breeze Corporation, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1950
- Bornstein v. Metropolitan Bottling Co., Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1958
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- ROSENBERG BY ROSENBERG v. CahillSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1985
- Brown v. Racquet Club of BricktownSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984
- Klimko v. RoseSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1980
- Cuthbertson v. Clark Equipment Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1982
- Joseph T. Ryerson & Son, Inc. v. H. A. Crane & Brother, Inc., Towmotor Corp., and Allied Chemical CorpCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1969
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.