Case ID: f2d_157/html/0075-01.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

TEICHMANN v. PARRISH.
    No. 9173.
    United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia.
    Argued May 30, 1946.
    Decided June 28, 1946.
    Mr. J. Harry Welch, of Washington, D. C. with whom Mr. H. Mason Welch, of Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellant. Messrs. Samuel B. Block and John R. Daily, both of Washington, D. C., also entered appearances for appellant.
    Mr. Robert H. McNeill, of Washington, D. C., for appellee.
    Before EDGERTON, WILBUR K. MILLER and PRETTYMAN, Associate Justices.
   PER CURIAM.

Appellee has recovered damages for alleged negligent treatment administered to her by or under the direction of appellant as a physician. The evidence was conflicting. The principal question is whether the evidence favorable to appellee, if believed, supports the verdict. We find that it does. Appellant’s other assignments of error are also without merit.

Affirmed.