# McKinney v. Schlatter

> Ohio Court of Appeals · February 18, 1997 · 118 Ohio App. 3d 328

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3713663

## Case

- **Full name:** McKINNEY Et Al., Appellants, v. SCHLATTER Et Al., Appellees
- **Court:** Ohio Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** February 18, 1997
- **Citations:** 118 Ohio App. 3d 328; 692 N.E.2d 1045
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Koehler
- **Judges:** Walsh, Koehler, Powell
- **Cited by:** 32 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Overruled on other grounds by Lownsbury v. VanBuren, 94 Ohio St. 3d 231 (2002).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3713663

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding a physician-patient relationship between an emergency room patient and an "on call" physician who had been consulted by the emergency room physician over the telephone and participated in the diagnosis and treatment of the patient
- finding physician-patient relationship between patient and on-call physician consulted over the telephone who participated in diagnosis and treatment of patient
- holding that the existence of a duty "depends upon whether there was a physician-patient relationship"

## Opinion text

Koehler, Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I believe the on-call cardiologist, Dr. Solomito, by rendering advice to the primary physician, became a party to the physician-patient relationship, and
*340
therefore the first assignment of error was well taken. The evidentiary questions raised by appellant likewise have merit. Accordingly, I dissent from the holding on the second and third assignments of error.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3713663. Public record. Not legal advice.