Brinkman v. Kursheedt

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Brinkman v. Kursheedt

84 N.Y.S. 575

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 6, 1903

StatusPublished

This text of 84 N.Y.S. 575 (Brinkman v. Kursheedt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brinkman v. Kursheedt, 84 N.Y.S. 575 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

BISCHOFF, J.

The justice’s conclusion upon the affirmative defense of malpractice is not opposed to the weight of the evidence, in view of the condition of the patient as disclosed within a very few days after the treatment had been discontinued by the plaintiff. .The [576]*576probability that the stone in the bladder were of sudden arising, due to a prior engysted condition, was not necessarily to be adopted, since that probability was met by the defendant’s testimony that the treatment was directed to some supposed abdominal trouble, and, so far, the physician’s failure to find the presence of stone in the bladder would not necessarily suggest that this actual condition, shortly afterward found in full development, did not then exist. Upon the proof submitted, an inference that the plaintiff failed to exercise the skill reasonably to be expected from a member of the profession in the community could easily be reached, and there is no ground for our disturbing the result.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BISCHOFF, J.

The justice’s conclusion upon the affirmative defense of malpractice is not opposed to the weight of the evidence, in view of the condition of the patient as disclosed within a very few days after the treatment had been discontinued by the plaintiff. .The [576]*576probability that the stone in the bladder were of sudden arising, due to a prior engysted condition, was not necessarily to be adopted, since that probability was met by the defendant’s testimony that the treatment was directed to some supposed abdominal trouble, and, so far, the physician’s failure to find the presence of stone in the bladder would not necessarily suggest that this actual condition, shortly afterward found in full development, did not then exist. Upon the proof submitted, an inference that the plaintiff failed to exercise the skill reasonably to be expected from a member of the profession in the community could easily be reached, and there is no ground for our disturbing the result.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 N.Y.S. 575, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brinkman-v-kursheedt-nyappterm-1903.