Cochran v. Miller
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Greene District Court. Mal-practice. Yerdict for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. As to the questions raised on the ruling of the court below in refusing to suppress portions of the deposition of C. H. Rawson, cited 1 Stark. Ey., 124; 2 Cow. & Hill’s Notes, Phil. Ey. (2d ed.), note 322, p. 722; McCarver v. Nealy, 1 G. Greene, 360; Hendricks & Cooper y. Wallis, 7 Iowa, 224; The State of Iowa y.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Greene District Court. Mal-practice. Yerdict for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. As to the questions raised on the ruling of the court below in refusing to suppress portions of the deposition of C. H. Rawson, cited 1 Stark. Ey., 124; 2 Cow. & Hill’s Notes, Phil. Ey. (2d ed.), note 322, p. 722; McCarver v. Nealy, 1 G. Greene, 360; Hendricks & Cooper y. Wallis, 7 Iowa, 224; The State of Iowa y. Nash and Bedont, 7 Id., 347. As to the ruling of the court upon the objection to the interrogatory propounded to the witness Cochran, Gibson y. Williams, 4 Wend., 320; Jefferson Insurance…
1Opinion of the CourtWright, J.
— It is first objected that the court erred in overruling tbe appellant’s objection to certain interrogatories to the witness Rawson, and the answers thereto. Raw-son was a physician. Plaintiff claims that defendant was guilty of negligence and malpractice in prescribing for and treating her arm. Rawson, the witness, did not see the arm for some time after this treatment. It was material, on the trial, to account for the scar found on the limb and the contraction of some of the muscles. It seems, that at the time of the treatment the plaintiff was thought to have erysipelas. The witness was…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Sebastian v. WoodSupreme Court of Iowa · 1954
- Pegram v. StortzWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1888
- Amos v. Prom, Inc.District Court, N.D. Iowa · 1953
- Pratt v. DavisAppellate Court of Illinois · 1905
- Hendrickson v. KingsburySupreme Court of Iowa · 1866
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.