Legal Opinion

Neeriemer v. Superior Court of Maricopa County

Court of Appeals of Arizona

Decided December 16, 1970No. 1 CA-CIV 1540PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HAIRE, Judge.

The petitioner by this special action seeks to reverse a ruling by the respondent trial judge that where the original complaint in a medical malpractice action alleges negligence in the performance of a surgical operation, an amended complaint which alleges a battery by reason of a failure to obtain the “informed consent” of the plaintiff to the operation does not “relate back” to the time of filing of the original complaint so as to defeat application of the statute of limitations. Though the question- is not without some difficulty, we have concluded that the challenged ruling…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Austin v. Massachusetts Bonding & InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Grudt v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Barthel v. StammCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1944
  4. Weinstock v. EisslerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
  5. Mayor v. DowsettOregon Supreme Court · 1965

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Arizona Title Insurance & Trust Co. v. O'Malley Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1971
  2. Wagner v. Georgetown University Medical CenterDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2001
  3. City of Scottsdale v. KokaskaCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1972
  4. Hartley v. DombrowskiDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
  5. Drug, Cosmetic & Beauty Trades Service, Inc. v. McFateCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1971

8 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