Opinion

Maercklein v. Smith

  • 129 Colo. 72
  • 266 P.2d 1095
  • 1954 Colo. LEXIS 357
Court
Supreme Court of Colorado
Filed
Feb 15, 1954
Status
Published
Author
Bradfield
On the bench
Clark, Bradfield
Cited by
20 cases

doctor performed vasectomy instead of circumcision, and patient sued for battery; when doctor raised as defense a one year statute of limitations, court held that doctor’s acts could also amount to negligence, with a longer period of limitations

How later courts described this case

  • doctor performed vasectomy instead of circumcision, and patient sued for battery; when doctor raised as defense a one year statute of limitations, court held that doctor’s acts could also amount to negligence, with a longer period of limitations
  • although the practice of obtaining a signed authorization is "laudable in every respect," it is not required

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Mr. Justice Bradfield

dissenting.

I approve the majority opinion for reversal and for direction of dismissal as to defendant, Postma. I must *83 respectfully dissent in its direction for retrial as to defendant, Maercklein. The majority opinion found plaintiff’s evidence insufficient to sustain the alleged contract, also insufficient to sustain the alleged negligence. In my opinion plaintiff having failed to prove his vital allegations, the case should be dismissed for insufficient evidence. I find no grounds justifying a retrial of these issues.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.