Legal Opinion

Trombley v. Kolts

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 16, 1938No. Civ. 11621PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWhite, J.

This action is one for damages against the defendant and respondent, a physician and surgeon, based upon certain acts of alleged negligence upon the part of respondent in the performance of an operation upon one of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs are husband and wife. In their amended complaint they allege that on the 24th day of January, 1932, plaintiffs employed the respondent as such physician and surgeon to perform an operation upon the plaintiff Ethel E. Trombley. It is further alleged that thereafter, to wit, on the 12th day of February, 1932, the respondent, pursuant to said employment,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Huysman v. KirschCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Akridge v. NobleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  3. Edgecomb v. CallahanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Iverson v. LancasterNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Weinstock v. EisslerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
  3. Paul Eugene Tessier v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1959
  4. Adams v. IsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1952
  5. Hundley v. St. Francis HospitalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958

24 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