Legal Opinion

Rennewanz v. Dean

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided September 30, 1924PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.

— This is an action against the defendant, who is a physician and surgeon, to recover damages for malpractice upon the plaintiff in an effort to cure him of hemorrhoids. In substance, the complaint alleges that in consideration of $200, which the plaintiff paid to the defendant, the latter agreed properly and skillfully to attend the plaintiff and to treat and cure him of the disease; that in pursuance of the contract, the defendant, with a reckless indifference and wanton disregard for the life and health of the plaintiff, gave him various injections in the rectum, and that about January 15,…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Kearney v. SnodgrassOregon Supreme Court · 1885
  2. Knahtla v. Oregon Short Line, etc., Ry. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Swift v. MulkeyOregon Supreme Court · 1886
  4. Wild v. Oregon Short Line, etc., Ry. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1891
  5. Alliance Trust Co. v. O'BrienOregon Supreme Court · 1897

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Hood v. PhillipsTexas Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Noe v. Kaiser Foundation HospitalsOregon Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Gill v. SellingOregon Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Medvecz v. ChoiCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1977
  5. Shepherd v. Hub Lumber Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1975

9 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