Teichmann v. Parrish
157 F.2d 75, 81 U.S. App. D.C. 217, 1946 U.S. App. LEXIS 2676
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedJune 28, 1946
DocketNo. 9173
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases
This text of 157 F.2d 75 (Teichmann v. Parrish) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Teichmann v. Parrish, 157 F.2d 75, 81 U.S. App. D.C. 217, 1946 U.S. App. LEXIS 2676 (D.C. Cir. 1946).
Opinion
Appellee has recovered damages for alleged negligent treatment administered to her by or under the direction of appellant as a physician. The evidence was conflicting. The principal question is whether the evidence favorable to appellee, if believed, supports the verdict. We find that it does. Appellant’s other assignments of error are also without merit.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Furr v. Herzmark
206 F.2d 468 (D.C. Circuit, 1953)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
157 F.2d 75, 81 U.S. App. D.C. 217, 1946 U.S. App. LEXIS 2676, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/teichmann-v-parrish-cadc-1946.