Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Messina v. Societe Francaise De Bienfaissance Et D'Assistance Mutuelle De La Nouvelle Orleans

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided November 30, 1936No. 16331Published

1Concurrence

McCALEB,' Judge

(concurring).

I cannot agree with the opinion of my associate that the externe Young was free from negligence in the case at bar. A reading of the record reveals that, after Miss Messina was removed from the hospital room, her condition was not what it should have been, and that her physician, Dr. Graf-fagnino, ordered the administration to her of hypodermatoclyses every eight hours. The administration of this treatment is said, by Dr. Kahle, who testified for the plaintiff, to be a therapeutic measure, which means that it is the application of a particular remedy for one who is…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Rome v. London & Lancashire Indemnity Co. of AmericaLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1936
  2. Brady v. Chicago & G. W. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
  3. Aderhold v. BishopSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
  4. Messmer v. Bell & Coggeshall Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1909
  5. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. SteppCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1908

5 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