Court Opinion

ID: 9446931
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 22:21:54.230061+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:30:50.538748
License: Public Domain

WOODBURY, Chief Judge
(dissenting).
I can point to no supporting authority, but it seems to me that there cannot be an action for malpractice unless it appears that the defendant, as a medical man or at least as one who holds himself out to be such, undertook to “practice” the healing art upon the plaintiff, either with the plaintiff’s consent, or if the plaintiff was unconscious at the time, without his consent. In short, I think a sine qua non of the action is an attempt to “practice” the healing art upon the plaintiff. Therefore, since Dr. Fellows was not attempting to use his art on the plaintiff but on her grandchild, I would say that the Maine statute limiting the time for bringing actions for malpractice to two years does not apply. I would, however, remand for a new trial for error in the admission of evidence.