Arant v. Kressler

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting appellant’s contention that “the time of discovery is the time when the treating physician’s actual negligence becomes known”
• noting when there is conflicting testimony regarding the time of discovery of a cause of action, whether the statute of limitations has run becomes a question of fact for the jury
• stating when there is conflicting testimony regarding time of discovery of facts giving notice of a medical malpractice claim, the date on which discovery should have been made becomes an issue for the jury to decide
• stating in a medical malpractice action that when there is conflicting testimony regarding time of discovery of facts giving notice, the date on which discovery should have been made becomes an issue for the jury to decide
• when testimony conflicts regarding time of discovery of a cause of action, it becomes an issue for the jury to decide
• when testimony conflicts regarding the time of discovery of a cause of action, it becomes an issue for the jury to decide

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).