Legal Opinion

Guillen v. Martin

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 15, 1958No. Civ. 5763PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShepard, J.

Plaintiff-respondent Aurora Guillen (hereinafter called plaintiff) on July 2, 1954, consulted defendant-appellant Dr. J. Needham Martin (hereinafter called defendant) with an abdominal complaint that ultimately led to a diagnosis of cholelithiasis and a cholecystectomy, or surgery for removal of the gall bladder, on August 6, 1954. Defendant performed the surgery with the assistance of other doctors and nurses.

This was the plaintiff’s first abdominal surgery in the area of the biliary ducts. The biliary duct system is composed of the right and left hepatic ducts which attach to and come…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Seneris v. HaasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Bauer v. OtisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
  3. Bates v. NewmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
  4. Gardner v. MarshallCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  5. Anglin v. ConwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Emmanuelli Vda. de Torres v. WombleSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1971
  2. Crowley v. O'NEILCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1980
  3. Warren v. Pacific Intermountain Express Co.California Court of Appeal · 1960
  4. Emmanuelli Widow of Torres v. WombleSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1971

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

Powered by the Exa API