Kelsey v. Tracy

California Court of Appeal

Kelsey v. Tracy

183 P. 668, 42 Cal. App. 409, 1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 673

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedJuly 28, 1919

DocketCiv. No. 2989.

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 183 P. 668 (Kelsey v. Tracy) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kelsey v. Tracy, 183 P. 668, 42 Cal. App. 409, 1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 673 (Cal. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

RICHARDS, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment in the defendant’s favor after an order sustaining the latter’s demurrer to the plaintiff’s second amended complaint.

[1] The action is one in which the plaintiff seeks to recover damages from the defendant for alleged losses of time and wages and for expenses incurred and pain in body and mind suffered by reason of the alleged want of knowledge and unskillfulness of the defendant as a physician and surgeon in the treatment of the plaintiff for certain bodily injuries under an agreement engaging the defendant to treat plaintiff professionally for such injuries. The action was commenced one year and six months after said treatment had ceased. The defendant’s demurrer upon the ground that the action was barred by the provisions of subdivision 3 of section 340 of the Code of Civil Procedure was sustained, and judgment in his favor followed, from which judgment this appeal has been taken.

We are unable to distinguish this case either as to its substantial facts or as to the issue of law involved from the case of Harding et al. v. Liberty Hospital Corp., decided by this court in 24 California Appellate Decisions, page 1021, which decision was upon rehearing affirmed by the supreme court in 177 Cal. 520, [171 Pac. 98], On the authority of that case and of the cases cited therein the judgment is affirmed.

Waste, P. J., and Bardin, J., pro tem., concurred.

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

RICHARDS, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment in the defendant’s favor after an order sustaining the latter’s demurrer to the plaintiff’s second amended complaint.

[1] The action is one in which the plaintiff seeks to recover damages from the defendant for alleged losses of time and wages and for expenses incurred and pain in body and mind suffered by reason of the alleged want of knowledge and unskillfulness of the defendant as a physician and surgeon in the treatment of the plaintiff for certain bodily injuries under an agreement engaging the defendant to treat plaintiff professionally for such injuries. The action was commenced one year and six months after said treatment had ceased. The defendant’s demurrer upon the ground that the action was barred by the provisions of subdivision 3 of section 340 of the Code of Civil Procedure was sustained, and judgment in his favor followed, from which judgment this appeal has been taken.

We are unable to distinguish this case either as to its substantial facts or as to the issue of law involved from the case of Harding et al. v. Liberty Hospital Corp., decided by this court in 24 California Appellate Decisions, page 1021, which decision was upon rehearing affirmed by the supreme court in 177 Cal. 520, [171 Pac. 98], On the authority of that case and of the cases cited therein the judgment is affirmed.

Waste, P. J., and Bardin, J., pro tem., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

183 P. 668, 42 Cal. App. 409, 1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 673, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kelsey-v-tracy-calctapp-1919.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack