Legal Opinion

Skar v. McKenney

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 15, 1916No. Nos. 19,864—(44)Published

Action in the district court for Hennepin county against the partners doing business as McKenney Dental Company, George E. Budd and Thomas Ryan to recover $5,00(1 for negligence in the treatment of plaintiff’s teeth. The case was tried before Fish, J., and a jury which returned a verdict for $400. From an order denying their motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial, defendants appealed.

1Per curiam

Plaintiff had a verdict. Defendants moved for a new trial and appeal from the order denying their motion.

This action was brought for negligence of defendant dentists in the performance of certain professional services for plaintiff. The evidence of the expert witnesses was in some respects sharply conflicting, as was the evi*478dence as to what occurred between the parties themselves. The issues were, what occurred between the parties, what treatment was given, whether the treatment was proper and whether plaintiff’s pain, suffering and annoyance were such only as necessarily result when dentists…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Haidt v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1905

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

Powered by the Exa API