Legal Opinion
Charleen T. Raddatz and Michael George Raddatz v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 28, 1984No. 84-1542PublishedCited by 43 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TANG, Circuit Judge:
I. OVERVIEW
Charleen and Michael Raddatz appeal from the district court’s summary judgment holding that their claims of medical malpractice against the United States are barred by the applicable two-year statute of limitations. 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b)(1976). The malpractice claims arise from the unsuccessful attempt by an Army physician to insert an intrauterine contraceptive device at Mrs. Raddatz’ request, and the alleged subsequent failure by a Navy physician to recognize or treat symptoms of infection, ultimately resulting in a hysterectomy operation. We find that the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- United States v. KubrickSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Richard Augustine v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Glynn Richard Davis v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Patricia Reilly v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1975
- Turner v. ProdCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- James E. Peterson v. Harold Kennedy, Richard A. Berthelsen, and National Football League Players AssociationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Victoria Rosales Jesus Rosales Rebecca Rosales v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Louise Drazan v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- Felisa Tunac v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
- Floyd L. Wehrman v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1987
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.