The appellant was a paying patient in respondent hospital, which had been incorporated for charitable purposes. The surgery for which he had been admitted was successfully performed by his private surgeon. The jury could have found, upon the evidence adduced, that following the operation it became necessary to catheterize appellant; that he was catheterized several times, the first time by an orderly in the employ of the hospital who was not a medical graduate; that the catheterization...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
