Burt v. James

How courts have described this case

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

• exception did not apply because plaintiff failed to prove a subsequent new injury; instead, the evidence showed only the existence of an original injury that remained “fairly constant” over time
• “limited exception” applies only in “extreme circumstances” involving new injury and asymptomatic period
• \limited exception\ applies only in \extreme circumstances\ involving new injury and asymptomatic period
• patient experienced redness, swelling, and pain at the site of the allegedly negligent back surgery from the time of surgery until he was properly diagnosed and treated; therefore, the Whitaker exception did not apply
• where the plaintiff experienced redness, swelling, and pain at the site of the allegedly negligent back surgery from the time of surgery until he was properly diagnosed and treated, plaintiff did not as a matter of law sustain a subsequent injury under Whitaker v. Zirkle
• where the plaintiff experienced redness, swelling, and pain at the site of the allegedly negligent back surgery from the time of surgery until he was properly diagnosed and treated, plaintiff did not as a matter of law sustain a subsequent injury under Whitaker v. Zirkle

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).