Legal Opinion

Moore v. Belt

California Supreme Court

Decided December 16, 1949No. L. A. 20994PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*527SHENK, J.

Appeal by the plaintiff from a judgment on a verdict for the defendant in an action to recover damages for alleged malpractice. The appeal is on a settled statement. Due to an admitted conflict in the testimony it is not contended that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict. The plaintiff’s principal assignments are that the court committed prejudicial error in the instructions on the issue of negligence and in rulings on the admission of evidence.

The defendant is a physician practicing in the county of Los Angeles and has specialized in urology since 1923. The…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Ybarra v. SpangardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Lawless v. CalawayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Sinz v. OwensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Barham v. WidingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Dierman v. Providence HospitalCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947

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

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co.California Court of Appeal · 1981
  2. Dambacher by Dambacher v. MallisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  3. Seneris v. HaasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  4. Mann v. CracchioloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  5. Huffman v. LindquistCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951

35 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