Legal Opinion

Jackson v. Bumgardner

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided November 6, 1984No. 8411SC6PublishedCited by 3 opinions

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

  1. Roe v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Griswold v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  3. Harbeson v. Parke-Davis, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Custodio v. BauerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
  5. Troppi v. ScarfMichigan Court of Appeals · 1971

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Azzolino v. DingfelderCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
  2. Gallagher v. Duke UniversityDistrict Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1986
  3. Jackson v. BumgardnerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API