Legal Opinion

Routen v. McGehee

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 16, 1945No. 4-7595PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Griefin Smith, Chief Justice.

One of thirty allegations of error is that a $4,000 judgment against the physician-defendant was not supported by substantial evidence. Another is that the burden of proving he was not negligent in fluoroscopy was imposed upon the defendant.

In attempting to locate an imbedded needle and remove it from Mary Lee McGehee’s foot, Dr. L. Routen of North Little Rock utilized a 30-milliampere fluoroscope through means of which reflected solid matter within the body may be observed. The mechanical arrangement was such that X-ray impulses could be directed for a limited…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Runyan v. GoodrumSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
  2. Brown v. DarkSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1938

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Norland v. Washington General HospitalCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1972
  2. Schmidt v. GibbsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1991
  3. Taylor v. RiddellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1995
  4. Adams v. HeffingtonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1950
  5. Norland v. Washington General HospitalCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1972

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API