Dodds v. Stellar
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, P. J.
Respondent sued for damages alleged to have resulted from injuries suffered from appellant’s negligent use of a fluoroscope in examining respondent’s hand. Following a verdict against appellant for $10,000 general damages and $4,942.05 special damages, judgment was entered for the aggregate of the two sums and for costs. On this ap peal reversal is demanded on the grounds of (1) insufficiency of the evidence to support a judgment for any sum, (2) insufficiency of the evidence to support the implied finding that respondent’s total damage was the proximate result of an X-ray burn sustained by…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Davenport v. StrattonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- Barham v. WidingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
- Raggio v. MalloryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
- Boa v. San Francisco-Oakland Terminal Rys.California Supreme Court · 1920
- Mirich v. BalsingerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Bowman v. McPheetersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Dodds v. StellarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
- Wilson v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- Martineau v. NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
- Drotleff v. RenshawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.