Sawyer v. Berthold
| Decision Date | 12 January 1912 |
| Docket Number | 17,361 - (147) |
| Parties | ELLA M. SAWYER v. J. L. BERTHOLD |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Action in the district court for Otter Tail county to recover $10,000 for malpractice. The answer specifically denied negligence in the treatment of plaintiff's arm and alleged that if it became permanently crippled, deformed stiff and useless, the condition was due solely to plaintiff's negligence. The reply was a general denial. The case was tried before Taylor, J., and a jury which returned a verdict in favor of plaintiff for $2,000. From an order denying defendant's motion in the alternative for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial, he appealed. Affirmed.
Action for malpractice -- opinion of expert based upon the result.
In an action against a physician to recover damages for negligent or unskillful treatment of a patient, the result alone is not evidence of negligence; but an expert witness may give his opinion, based upon the result, that the treatment must have been improper, and such an opinion is evidence on which the court or jury may find negligence.
Question for jury -- verdict sustained by evidence.
Evidence in this case considered, and held, that the question of defendant's negligence was for the jury, and that the evidence sustains the verdict.
M. J Daly, for appellant.
Parsons & Brown, for respondent.
This action was brought against the defendant, a physician and surgeon, to recover damages claimed to be the result of negligent and unskillful treatment of a fracture of plaintiff's wrist. The case was submitted to the jury, and a verdict returned for plaintiff, assessing her damages at $2,000. Defendant moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial, and appealed from the order denying such motion.
The main questions before us are whether there was evidence to take the case to the jury, and, if so, whether the evidence so preponderates against the verdict that it was an abuse of discretion to refuse a new trial.
Plaintiff, a woman forty-six years of age, early in the morning of June 16, 1909, fell on the stairs at her home in Perham, and sustained what is known as a Colle's fracture of the tip of the radius and the ligaments in the wrist joint. It is admitted that the fracture was an aggravated one that required skill and care on the part of the surgeon. Defendant, who is a physician and surgeon residing at Perham, was immediately called. He diagnosed the case correctly, and treated the injured wrist by the application of splints and bandages, with the object of effecting a reduction of the fracture and a union of the bones. About six weeks after the accident defendant determined that a union had taken place, removed the splints and bandages, and ceased treating plaintiff. At the time of the trial plaintiff's hand was in an abnormal, deformed position, she had little or no use of the hand or fingers, and continued to suffer pain.
The result, whether of the fracture, or of defendant's treatment, was admittedly bad. The evidence to show that d...
To continue reading
Request your trial