George v. Phoenix Assurance Co.

Fifth Circuit

George v. Phoenix Assurance Co.

328 F.2d 430

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 17, 1964

DocketNo. 20778

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 328 F.2d 430 (George v. Phoenix Assurance Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

George v. Phoenix Assurance Co., 328 F.2d 430 (5th Cir. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a malpractice action against one of the defendant’s insureds, a practicing physician in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The plaintiff alleged that his wife died as a result of the insured’s negligence and malpractice. At the close of the plaintiff’s ease, the district court dismissed the action, under Rule 41(b), for failure to show a right to relief. The district court found:

“Here the plaintiff has failed to prove by any evidence the degree or standard of care required of a physician in such a case as here involved, and has failed to prove by any evidence whatsoever that [the physician] either deviated from an accepted standard, or was in any way negligent in his treatment of Ora Lee George. This record, at the close of plaintiff’s case, was completely void of any such evidence.”

After a careful study of the record, including a number of depositions, we cannot say that the holding of the district court was clearly erroneous.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is a malpractice action against one of the defendant’s insureds, a practicing physician in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The plaintiff alleged that his wife died as a result of the insured’s negligence and malpractice. At the close of the plaintiff’s ease, the district court dismissed the action, under Rule 41(b), for failure to show a right to relief. The district court found:

“Here the plaintiff has failed to prove by any evidence the degree or standard of care required of a physician in such a case as here involved, and has failed to prove by any evidence whatsoever that [the physician] either deviated from an accepted standard, or was in any way negligent in his treatment of Ora Lee George. This record, at the close of plaintiff’s case, was completely void of any such evidence.”

After a careful study of the record, including a number of depositions, we cannot say that the holding of the district court was clearly erroneous.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

328 F.2d 430, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/george-v-phoenix-assurance-co-ca5-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack