Legal Opinion

Parkerson v. Arthur

Court of Appeals of Arkansas

Decided October 22, 2003No. CA 02-1054PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Neal, Judge.

This is the second time that this medical-negligence action has been before this court. Following remand, the trial court granted appellees’ motion for summary judgment on appellant’s informed-consent and medical-battery claims. We affirm.

On March 20, 1990, appellees Dr. James Arthur and Dr. Allan Gocio performed an anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion surgery on appellant Gail Parkerson. During the surgery, appellees used an artificial block as graft material to surgically join appellant’s vertebrae. The graft material used by the appellees was a product called “Orthoblock,”…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Bushong v. Garman Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1992
  2. Clemmons v. Office of Child Support EnforcementSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2001
  3. Fortenberry v. FrazierSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1843
  4. Griffin v. First Nat. Bank of CrossettSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1994
  5. Eady v. LansfordSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2002

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hamilton v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2007
  2. Bell v. HoofmanCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2010
  3. Floreal-Wooten v. HelderDistrict Court, W.D. Arkansas · 2023
  4. Hamilton v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2007
  5. Parkerson v. ArthurCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2003

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

Powered by the Exa API