Jackson v. Bumgardner
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
WHICHARD, Judge.
In pertinent part, the complaint alleges the following:
Plaintiff-wife consulted defendant, a licensed physician, concerning uterine bleeding. Defendant performed on plaintiff-wife a dilation and curettage (D and C) of the uterus and a biopsy of the cervix. At the time of consultation and surgery plaintiff-wife was protected by a contraceptive intrauterine device (IUD) which defendant agreed to maintain in place or, if necessary, reinsert.
Three months later plaintiff-wife again consulted defendant concerning an ovarian cyst, and defendant performed exploratory surgery. At that…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Roe v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Griswold v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Harbeson v. Parke-Davis, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1983
- Custodio v. BauerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
- Troppi v. ScarfMichigan Court of Appeals · 1971
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Azzolino v. DingfelderCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
- Gallagher v. Duke UniversityDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1986
- Jackson v. BumgardnerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984