Legal Opinion

Shaweker v. Spinell

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided June 8, 1932No. 23378PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtArlen, J.

In this case the plaintiff, A. T. Spinell, brought an action for damages against the defendants, Earl K. Shaweker and Fred A. Bowers, who are practicing physicians and surgeons, alleging that upon February 20, 1930, the defendants performed an operation known as hysterectomy upon his wife, Rose Spinell, and that she died on the same day.

Plaintiff alleged facts sufficient to charge malpractice, and then set forth that by reason of such facts he had been deprived of the society, companionship and consortium of his wife, and prayed damages therefor. The answer of each defendant admitted the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Grosso v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1888
  2. Sherlag v. KelleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
  3. Womack v. Central Railroad & Banking Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1888

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Archie v. HamptonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1972
  2. Cramer v. PriceOhio Court of Appeals · 1948
  3. Pauline Nenoff v. George M. ThompsonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1973
  4. DeWitt v. B & C Machine Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1971
  5. Floor Craft Floor Covering, Inc. v. Parma Community General Hospital Ass'nOhio Supreme Court · 1990

1 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