# Drs. Lane, Bryant, Eubanks & Dulaney v. Otts

> Supreme Court of Alabama · March 26, 1982 · 412 So. 2d 254

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9936496

## Case

- **Full name:** Drs. Lane, Bryant, Eubanks Dulaney, a Partnership Composed of Martin L. Lane, Edward L. Bryant, Jr., R. Eubanks, Jr., and Frank M. Dulaney v. Margaret B. Otts, as Administratrix of the Estate of William E. Otts
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Alabama
- **Decided:** March 26, 1982
- **Citations:** 412 So. 2d 254
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Shores
- **Judges:** Beatty, Maddox, Shores, Torbert
- **Cited by:** 27 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9936496

## Opinion text

I concur in the result only because I cannot agree that "the same general neighborhood" rule adopted by the legislature in § 6-5-484 , Ala. Code 1975, was intended to mean the national medical community. I am not sure what "national medical community" means.
We all know that physicians, like lawyers, are trained in schools, some of which are *Page 262
excellent and some of which are woefully inadequate. Physicians, like lawyers, are not tested by medical standardized tests and are not subjected to identical continuing medical education. It just seems to be unreasonable to say that a physician practicing in a rural Alabama County should be judged by the same standards as one practicing in New York or some other metropolitan area affording a greater opportunity to keep abreast of the very latest techniques and treatments.
I concur in the affirmance only because, in this case, the evidence showed that the defendant failed to follow the standard prevailing in Mobile and that practiced by other physicians under circumstances the same as or similar to those prevailing in Mobile.
ALMON, J., concurs.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9936496. Public record. Not legal advice.