The Railway Surgeon Volume 9, No. 10 (Paperback)


This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1903 Excerpt: ...it had previously listened to the testimony of the plaintiff. There was no chance for comparison. There is little likelihood that the case will be appealed, although there is need of a precedent, there having been heretofore no X-ray case ever decided in any Supreme court in the country. This case is so plainly one of fact that there is little chance of the Appellate Court reviewing it. It will assist in removing a sense of timidity which practitioners cannot help having in the use of the X-ray for the treatment of their patients. It is apparent by this case that the court did not consider that the defendant had made such a departure from the recognized methods of his school that he would be liable for any injury, whether or no he was negligent. But he recognized the X-ray treatment as one being quite generally adopted and used, and that the practitioner using it would be liable for ordinary negligence and for failure to exercise ordinary skill and care, just as any physician or surgeon is held.--Med. Legal Bull. X-RAY SUIT UNSUCCESSUL. A suit of interest to physicians has just been decided by Justice O'Gorman in the Supreme Court, who dismissed the damage suit of Miss Josephine MacDonald against Xelson T. Shields and G. F. Jernigan, dentists, and M. J. O'Connor, X-ray specialist, without letting it go to the jury. She sued to recover $50,000 for damages she alleged she sustained through an X-ray examination made on her by O'Connor, under the supervision of the other two defendants, whom she had consulted as dentists, in regard to the condition of her teeth. She was severely burned by the rays, and her hair fell out, leaving her bald. Justice O'Gorman decides that Shields had nothing to do with the operation, which was entirely under the supervision of O'Co...

R354

Or split into 4x interest-free payments of 25% on orders over R50
Learn more

Discovery Miles3540
Delivery AdviceOut of stock

Toggle WishListAdd to wish list
Review this Item

Product Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1903 Excerpt: ...it had previously listened to the testimony of the plaintiff. There was no chance for comparison. There is little likelihood that the case will be appealed, although there is need of a precedent, there having been heretofore no X-ray case ever decided in any Supreme court in the country. This case is so plainly one of fact that there is little chance of the Appellate Court reviewing it. It will assist in removing a sense of timidity which practitioners cannot help having in the use of the X-ray for the treatment of their patients. It is apparent by this case that the court did not consider that the defendant had made such a departure from the recognized methods of his school that he would be liable for any injury, whether or no he was negligent. But he recognized the X-ray treatment as one being quite generally adopted and used, and that the practitioner using it would be liable for ordinary negligence and for failure to exercise ordinary skill and care, just as any physician or surgeon is held.--Med. Legal Bull. X-RAY SUIT UNSUCCESSUL. A suit of interest to physicians has just been decided by Justice O'Gorman in the Supreme Court, who dismissed the damage suit of Miss Josephine MacDonald against Xelson T. Shields and G. F. Jernigan, dentists, and M. J. O'Connor, X-ray specialist, without letting it go to the jury. She sued to recover $50,000 for damages she alleged she sustained through an X-ray examination made on her by O'Connor, under the supervision of the other two defendants, whom she had consulted as dentists, in regard to the condition of her teeth. She was severely burned by the rays, and her hair fell out, leaving her bald. Justice O'Gorman decides that Shields had nothing to do with the operation, which was entirely under the supervision of O'Co...

Customer Reviews

No reviews or ratings yet - be the first to create one!

Product Details

General

Imprint

Rarebooksclub.com

Country of origin

United States

Release date

May 2012

Availability

Supplier out of stock. If you add this item to your wish list we will let you know when it becomes available.

First published

May 2012

Authors

Dimensions

246 x 189 x 2mm (L x W x T)

Format

Paperback - Trade

Pages

36

ISBN-13

978-1-235-98008-4

Barcode

9781235980084

Categories

LSN

1-235-98008-1



Trending On Loot