Hudson v. Taleff

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that jury was not impartial where court refused challenges for cause of two jurors with connections to defendant doctor
• holding that jury was not impartial where court refused challenges for cause of two jurors with connections to defendant doctor
• holding that physician not liable for every untoward result and not insurer of success
• stating that the defendant has a constitutional right to “a trial by an impartial jury” (quoting Miss. Const. art. 3, § 26)
• reversal warranted where forty-eight percent of veniremen had connection with defendant
• reversal warranted where forty-eight percent of 17 veniremen had connection with defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).