Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Hastings v. Baton Rouge General Hospital

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided March 25, 1986No. CA 84 1436Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCarter, Judge

I agree with the majority insofar as they sustain the motions for directed verdicts in favor of Baton Rouge General Hospital and Dr. Joseph R. Gerdes, Jr., but I cannot agree with the majority insofar as they sustain the motion for directed verdict in favor of Dr. E. Edward McCool.

According to the jurisprudence of this state, the standard of care owed by a physician is to exercise that degree of skill and care which is usually possessed and exercised by members of his profession and to use reasonable care and diligence, along with his best judgment, in the application of his skill to the case…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Meyer v. St. Paul-Mercury Indemnity Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1954
  2. Uter v. Bone and Joint ClinicSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1966
  3. Borne v. BrumfieldLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1978
  4. Harwell v. PittmanLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1983
  5. Lauro v. Travelers Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1972

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

Powered by the Exa API