Samuelson v. Freeman

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that for medical malpractice of a continuous and uninterrupted nature, the statute of limitations does not begin to run until the treatment for that particular illness or condition has been terminated
• determining giving six instructions on the standard of care was error
• in medical malpractice case, limitation period is tolled until treatment for particular illness or condition has terminated
• in extreme cases where instructions are repetitive and Overlapping, the combined instructions may be so \palpably unfair\ as to constitute reversible error
• but see: Bixler v. Bowman, 94 Wash.2d 146, 614 P.2d 1290 (1980)
• “[I]f malpractice is claimed during a continuous and substantially uninterrupted course of treatment for a particular illness or condition, the statute does not begin to run until the treatment for that particular illness or condition has been terminated.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).