Legal Opinion

Rasmussen v. Shickle

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 7, 1935No. Civ. 9287PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WILLIS, J., pro tem.

This is an appeal from a judgment of nonsuit in an action for malpractice against a physician. Appellant claims errors in granting motion for nonsuit and in sustaining objection to the competency of an expert witness to give his opinion of respondent’s treatment of his patient.

Respondent was employed by appellant to reduce oblique fractures of both bones of the leg and to treat the case until healing was accomplished. It is alleged and shown by evidence that some three weeks after the bones had been set respondent massaged the leg and manipulated the foot and anide, and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Houghton v. DicksonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916
  2. Hesler v. California Hospital Co.California Supreme Court · 1918
  3. Markart v. ZeimerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  4. Callahan v. Hahnemann HospitalCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Hiraide v. CochranCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Sinz v. OwensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Stafford v. ShultzCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Keene v. WigginsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
  4. Valentin v. La Societe FrancaiseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  5. Bickford v. LawsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938

6 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