Marty v. Somers
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
THE COURT.
Defendant, being a physician and surgeon, was employed by plaintiff “to cure him of bladder trouble,” which the complaint alleges he undertook to do. Thereafter defendant advised plaintiff that an operation was necessary in the treatment of the malady, and agreed with the plaintiff to perform the same for the sum of $250. Said operation was performed, and, according to the complaint, “was unsuccessful, and said defendant did not cure said plaintiff of his malady; that said operation left plaintiff in a worse condition; that plaintiff’s urinary organs have become paralyzed and…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Basler v. Sacramento Elec., Gas & Ry.California Supreme Court · 1913
3Cited by17 opinions
- Howe v. Pioneer Manufacturing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1968
- Rubino v. Utah Canning Co.California Court of Appeal · 1954
- Harding v. Liberty Hospital Corp.California Supreme Court · 1918
- Schmitt v. EsserSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
- Mirich v. BalsingerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.