Simpson v. Davis
Supreme Court of Kansas
1DissentKaul, J.
I cannot agree with the court’s holding that the trial court erred in overruling plaintiff s motion for a directed verdict on the issue of negligence, therefore I must respectfully dissent from paragraph 5(b) of the syllabus and the corresponding portions of the opinion. In effect, the majority holding is that the dropping of a dental reamer by defendant in plaintiff’s mouth, while performing a root canal procedure, constituted negligence as a matter of law. This conclusion is largely based upon what is said to be an admission of defendant and -application of the well-established principle…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lipman v. LustigMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1963
- Dufrene v. FagetLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1972