Skip to main content

Jarboe v. Harting

Citations

  • 397 S.W.2d 775
  • 1965 Ky. LEXIS 84

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that where the common knowledge or experience of laymen jurors is extensive enough to recognize or infer medical negligence from the circumstances then an expert witness is not necessary
  • holding that where the common knowledge or experience of laymen jurors is extensive enough to recognize or infer medical negligence from the circumstances then an expert witness is not necessary
  • doctor misdiagnosed pregnant patient as having a uterine tumor and failed to perform pregnancy test before surgery — doctor admitted he should have performed the pregnancy test
  • doctor misdiagnosed pregnant patient as having a uterine tumor and failed to perform pregnancy test before surgery — doctor admitted he should have performed the pregnancy test
  • “[W]e recognize[] the rule that ordinarily expert evidence is necessary to support the conclusion of causation.”
  • “[W]e recognize[] the rule that ordinarily expert evidence is necessary to support the conclusion of causation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cullen, Stewart

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

39 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.