Legal Opinion

Wetzel v. Pius

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 21, 1926No. Docket No. 3066PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SHIELDS, J., pro tem.

This is an action for damages against a physician and surgeon for malpractice in negligently setting the femur bone in plaintiff’s leg.

In his complaint plaintiff charges that on or about the seventeenth day of May, 1922, he broke this bone in his right leg, and, relying upon the skill of defendant, employed him to attend to the injury and to give him such care and treatment as was usual and necessary in such eases to effect a cure. Continuing, plaintiff charges that defendant so negligently and unskillfully conducted himself in attempting to set the leg that the ends of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Denning v. StateCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Basler v. Sacramento Elec., Gas & Ry.California Supreme Court · 1913
  3. Harding v. Liberty Hospital Corp.California Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Krebenios v. LindauerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  5. Coady v. ReinsMontana Supreme Court · 1872

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Huysman v. KirschCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  2. Pashley v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Barham v. WidingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  4. Eads v. MarksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
  5. Johnson v. St. Patrick's HospitalMontana Supreme Court · 1966

18 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