Hannemann v. Boyson
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
1Opinion of the CourtPeterson, J.
¶ 1. Craig Boyson, a chiropractor, appeals a judgment finding him negligent in his care and treatment of Gary Hannemann. Hannemann suffered a stroke after Boyson gave him a cervical adjustment. Boyson argues the court erred by (1) eliminating the final paragraph from the standard informed consent jury instruction, and (2) giving a standard causation instruction rather than one that would allow the jury to find partial causation from another source. We disagree and affirm on these issues. Boyson further argues the special verdict was erroneous because it only asked whether Boyson was negligent…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Union Pacific Railway Co. v. BotsfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Schloendorff v. Society of the New York HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1914
- State v. DyessWisconsin Supreme Court · 1985
- Fischer Ex Rel. Fischer v. GanjuWisconsin Supreme Court · 1992
- White v. LeederWisconsin Supreme Court · 1989
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hannemann v. BoysonWisconsin Supreme Court · 2005
- Hannemann v. BoysonWisconsin Supreme Court · 2005