holding that, when a surgeon negligently leaves a foreign object in a patient’s body, the statute of limitations is tolled “until the patient learns of, or in exercise of reasonable care and diligence should have learned of the presence of such foreign object in his body”
How later courts described this case
- holding that, when a surgeon negligently leaves a foreign object in a patient’s body, the statute of limitations is tolled “until the patient learns of, or in exercise of reasonable care and diligence should have learned of the presence of such foreign object in his body”
- interpreting a state statute of limitation
- discovery rule applied in malpractice action against doctor and hospital
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
MR. JUSTICE DOYLE:
I respectfully dissent. Viewed in any perspective the majority opinion overrules by implication, Coady v. Reins, 1 Mont. 424 . Further the majority suspend the statute of limitations. The legislature can hear the opposing arguments for the repeal, qualification or amendment of the statute.
This court does not have or possess such inherent right in determining the law.