Legal Opinion
Schanil v. Branton
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided October 24, 1930No. 27,832PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDibell, J.
An action to recover for malpractice. There Avas a verdict for the plaintiff, and defendants appeal from the order denying their alternative motion for judgment or a new trial.
The plaintiff 2as injured on October 3, 1926, and on that dajr was taken to the defendants’ hospital for treatment. He .was discharged from the hospital on November 19, 1926. There was then a cast upon his leg. He returned for examination in January, 1927, and again in February. The action was commenced on November 15, 1928.
The defendants claim that the two-year statute of limitations, G. S. 1923, § 9193, as amended, 2…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Schmitt v. EsserSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
- Whittaker v. CollinsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
- Bush v. CressSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1929
3Cited by9 opinions
- Borgia v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1962
- Berry v. BrannerOregon Supreme Court · 1966
- Seitz v. JonesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1961
- Williams v. EliasNebraska Supreme Court · 1941
- Peteler v. RobinsonUtah Supreme Court · 1932
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.