Legal Opinion

Stoskoff v. Wicklund

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided April 17, 1923PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNuessle, J.

The plaintiff, George Stoskoff, was an old man seventy years of age. He had a corn on the little toe of his right foot, lie treated it himself for five or six weeks but it continued to get worse until it became so painful that finally on October 13th, 1919, he consulted the defendant, Carl A. Wicklund, a physician practising at Wild-rose, North Dakota. The defendant, after examining the plaintiff’s foot, told him that ho had a soft corn on the inside of his little toe; that the condition had become so bad that it would be necessary to remove the toe. To this the plaintiff objected and went…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Demars v. Glen Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1892
  2. Shoemaker v. Bryant Lumber & Shingle Mill Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Edwards v. BurkeWashington Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Beardsley v. EwingNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1918
  5. First National Bank v. DavidsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1922

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Andrews v. O'HEARNNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Lusby v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1958
  3. State v. ArchboldNebraska Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Wright v. ConwayWyoming Supreme Court · 1925
  5. Guedon v. RooneyOregon Supreme Court · 1938

14 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