Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer

[Download] "Capps v. Valk" by Supreme Court of Kansas ~ eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free

Capps v. Valk

📘 Read Now     📥 Download


eBook details

  • Title: Capps v. Valk
  • Author : Supreme Court of Kansas
  • Release Date : January 03, 1962
  • Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
  • Pages : * pages
  • Size : 50 KB

Description

The opinion of the court was delivered by This was an action to recover damages for malpractice in
leaving an eight-inch drain tube in the body of the plaintiff.
The case was here previously, Capps v. Valk, 184 Kan. 796,
339 P.2d 62, and it was held plaintiff's second amended petition
alleged a cause of action against the defendant. Trial was had
upon the issues by a jury, and at the close of the plaintiff's
case the district court sustained defendant's demurrer to the
plaintiff's evidence and entered judgment for the defendant.
Thereafter the plaintiff filed a motion for a new trial, which
was overruled, and this appeal followed. The evidence is summarized and quoted: Plaintiff, Cecile Capps,
is married and resides with her husband in Independence, Kansas.
She had pain in the region of her left kidney and had been
running a temperature over a period of several days. She
consulted Dr. R.G. Carter, of Independence, their family
physician. Dr. Carter advised her to have an X-ray of that area
as he thought it was probable a stone was located some place in
the kidney or ureter. X-rays were taken, later sent to the
defendant, which disclosed a stone in the left ureter. Dr. Carter
advised the plaintiff her condition necessitated special
treatment and he recommended the defendant, Dr. William L. Valk,
who was a specialist in urology and also head of the section of
urology at the University of Kansas Medical Center in Kansas
City, Kansas. Dr. Carter was well acquainted with Dr. Valk and
knew of his specialized professional ability, and had previously
referred patients to him. Dr. Carter called Dr. Valk at the
Medical Center concerning the plaintiff's condition and told him
he was referring her to him for treatment. Dr. Carter advised the
plaintiff to go to the Medical Center where she would be treated
personally by the defendant.


Ebook Free Online "Capps v. Valk" PDF ePub Kindle