Jenkins v. Metropolitan Life Ins.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtTaft, J.
In onr opinion, it is not necessary for us to determine whether the trial court erred in regarding the document signed by plaintiff as an express consent by the plaintiff to the testimony of the three doctors consulted by her husband, because we are of the opinion that the evidence in the record, apart from the portion of testimony of those physicians which would have been inadmissible without such “express consent” of plaintiff because of the physician-patient privilege provided for in Section 2317.02, Revised Code, is such as to require judgment for defendant as a matter of law.
Section…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Travelers Insurance v. PomerantzNew York Court of Appeals · 1927
- General American Life Ins. v. WojciechowskiMichigan Supreme Court · 1946
- Harnischfeger Sales Corp. v. National Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1935
- Connolly v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United StatesSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1934