Wright v. Clement

190 N.E. 11, 287 Mass. 175, 1934 Mass. LEXIS 1011
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedJune 26, 1934
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 190 N.E. 11 (Wright v. Clement) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wright v. Clement, 190 N.E. 11, 287 Mass. 175, 1934 Mass. LEXIS 1011 (Mass. 1934).

Opinion

Lummus, J.

This is an action of tort against a physician. The first count alleges that in treating the plaintiff’s testatrix before, during and after childbirth he was guilty of “wanton and reckless acts” as well as “negligence,” which caused her death. The second count is for conscious suffering from the same wrong. No question of pleading is raised. There was not the slightest evidence of any “wanton and reckless acts,” and the only question argued relates to the negligence alleged.

There was evidence tending to show negligence in failing to discover that the plaintiff’s testatrix had scarlet fever until the disease was advanced beyond the point at which antitoxin might have been of service. There was evidence tending to show negligence in removing her from the maternity ward of a hospital to her mother’s tenement, where facilities for treatment and care were limited, rather than to a hospital for contagious diseases. She died from septicemia, the result of scarlet fever. The difficulty with the plaintiff’s case is that there is nothing to show any probability that she would have recovered or lived longer or suffered less, if due care had been used. Semerjian v. Stetson, 284 Mass. 510. De Filippo’s Case, 284 Mass. 531. Compare Bennett v. Fitzgerald, 284 Mass. 535, and Marangian v. Apelian, 286 Mass. 429. The direction of a verdict in favor of the defendant was right.

Judgment for the defendant.

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

Related

Matsuyama v. Birnbaum
452 Mass. 1 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2008)
Cinis v. Post
304 N.E.2d 207 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1973)
Murphy v. Conway
277 N.E.2d 681 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1972)
Aurelio v. Laird
223 N.E.2d 531 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1967)
Woronka v. Sewall
69 N.E.2d 581 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1946)
Edwards v. Clark
83 P.2d 1021 (Utah Supreme Court, 1938)
Zimmerman v. Litvich
7 N.E.2d 437 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1937)
Barker v. Heaney
82 S.W.2d 417 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
190 N.E. 11, 287 Mass. 175, 1934 Mass. LEXIS 1011, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wright-v-clement-mass-1934.