Marty

Marty v. Somers

Good Law
1917 Cal. App. LEXIS 361·35 Cal. App. 182·169 P. 411
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 30, 1917Civ. No. 2257.California460 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Defendant, being a physician and surgeon, was employed by plaintiff “to cure him of bladder trouble,” which the complaint alleges he undertook to do. Thereafter defendant advised plaintiff that an operation was necessary in the treatment of the malady, and agreed with the plaintiff to perform the same for the sum of $250. Said operation was performed, and, according to the complaint, “was unsuccessful, and said defendant did not cure said plaintiff of his malady; that said operation left plaintiff in a worse condition; that plaintiff’s urinary organs have become paralyzed and plaintiff has completely lost the use thereof; that plaintiff has suffered, and still suffers, great pain, and has become weakened in body and his physical health and constitution have been greatly impaired. That by reason of the premises, plaintiff has suffered damages in the sum of ten thousand dollars.” The complaint prays judgment for said sum.

The action was commenced more than one year after the performance of said operation and treatment, and the defendant demurred to the complaint, and pleaded subdivision 3 of section 340 of the Code of Civil Procedure in bar of the action. This demurrer was…

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.