Langford

Langford v. Kosterlitz

Good Law
107 Cal. App. 175·1930 Cal. App. LEXIS 409·290 P. 80
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 10, 1930Docket No. 7134.California3,498 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Deasy, J.

Respondent, for some time prior to the seventh day of December, 1926, had suffered from asthma. He had been treated from time to time by many doctors, but had obtained only temporary relief. Some few months prior to said date an operation had been performed on respondent’s nose by a Doctor Martin, in which part of the middle turbinate bone and also some infected ethmoid cells had been removed. On said date, respondent called on appellant, and after stating his condition and the facts about the operation as he knew them, was examined by appellant and employed appellant as a physician to perform an operation, suggested by the latter, which consisted of injecting alcohol and novocaine into the spheno-palatine ganglion or nasal ganglion, for the purpose of killing the nerves and relieving the trouble. In the evening of that day the operation was performed, and according to respondent’s claim, appellant negligently pushed a hypodermic needle through the bony structure between his right nostril and his right orbit, and injected alcohol and novocaine into the orbit, causing an atrophy of the optic nerve and destroying entirely the sight of his right eye. Respondent brought this action…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.