Legal Opinion

Bennett v. Murdy

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided August 12, 1933No. File No. 7416PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWarren, J.

In March, 1930, plaintiff employed defendant to do certain surgical work, and on the 29th day of March, 1930, defendant performed an operation upon the plaintiff for the removal of two middle turbinal bones, called turbinates in the briefs, from her nasal cavity. A local anaesthetic was administered, and the turbinals were removed by using a scissors which cut through the base of the bony structure. Plaintiff claims that during the operation portions of the turbinate bones were lost. One was about the size of a dime, though rectangular in form, and the other about the size of the end joint of…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Ault v. HallOhio Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Howland v. Oakland Consolidated Street Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Nelson v. Painless ParkerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  4. Crouch v. National Livestock Remedy Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1928
  5. James v. RobertsonUtah Supreme Court · 1911

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Whetstine v. MoravecSupreme Court of Iowa · 1940
  2. Magbuhat v. KovarikSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Block v. McVaySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1964
  4. Van Zee v. Sioux Valley HospitalSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Lenius v. KingSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1980

4 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