Lathrope

Lathrope v. Flood

Caution
1901 Cal. LEXIS 1270·6 Cal. Unrep. 637·63 P. 1007
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 20, 1901S. F. No. 1703California1,213 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Henshaw, J.

This is an action against a physician to recover damages for the alleged injuries occasioned by his negligent and unskillful treatment of his patient, and for injuries resulting from the violation of his contract of em *638 ployment in abandoning her case, and leaving her, in a critical period, without proper or any medical attendance. The case was tried by a jury, which rendered a verdict for plaintiff in the sum of $2,000. This appeal is taken from the judgment and from the order denying the defendant a new trial.

The defendant, P. H. Flood,' a practicing physician in San Francisco, was employed by the plaintiffs to attend Margaret Lathrope in her prospective confinement. She was a young married woman, and pregnant with her first child. At the beginning of her labor, Dr. Flood was sent for and attended. He concluded that the case would be a prolonged one, and went away, visiting the house at intervals. He returned on the evening of the twenty-seventh day of April, and after examination of his patient decided that it would be necessary to employ instruments to aid in the delivery of the child, and that the time for the use of such instruments had arrived. He therefore ordered…

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.