Case ID: wash_96/html/0700-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[No. 13763.
    Department One.
    June 11, 1917.]
    Henriette Weaver, Respondent, v. G. A. Rohrer, Appellant.
      
    
    Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Spokane county, Huneke, J., entered July 3, 1916, upon the verdict of a jury rendered in favor of the plaintiff, in an action for malpractice.
    Affirmed.
    
      Danson, Williams é Danson (George D. Lantz, of counsel), for appellant.
    
      Harry L. Cohn, for respondent.
    
      
       Reported in 165 Pac. 971.
    
   Per Curiam.

— Action for malpractice in the treatment of a Colies fracture. The only assignments of error are based upon the insufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdict. Having read the record, we are unable to say that there is no evidence to justify a recovery. It would serve no good purpose to recite the evidence which sustains the verdict. It is enough to find that while, as in most cases of this character, the evidence is conflicting, there is competent evidence to the effect that appellant’s treatment of respondent’s arm was improper and that as a result respondent suffered damage.

The case having been fairly submitted to the jury upon a plain question of fact, the judgment must stand.