Brown v. Shyne case brief summary
151 N.E. 197 (N.Y. 1926)
CASE FACTS
Plaintiff employed defendant to provide her with chiropractic treatments. As a result, plaintiff became paralyzed after she had received nine treatments. Plaintiff brought suit claiming that the paralysis was caused by the treatment she received.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
When plaintiff recovered judgment for the damages caused by said injury, defendant appealed based upon the trial court's charge to the jury. The trial court had instructed the jury that from defendant's violation of the Public Health Laws of New York, which prohibited the practice of medicine without a license, the jury might infer negligence which produced injury to the plaintiff.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
Judgment in favor of plaintiff was reversed.
Suggested Study Aids For Tort Law



151 N.E. 197 (N.Y. 1926)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendant chiropractor
appealed from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme
Court in the Fourth Judicial Department (New York), which affirmed a
judgment awarding damages to plaintiff patient for injuries she
sustained as a result of defendant's negligence.CASE FACTS
Plaintiff employed defendant to provide her with chiropractic treatments. As a result, plaintiff became paralyzed after she had received nine treatments. Plaintiff brought suit claiming that the paralysis was caused by the treatment she received.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
When plaintiff recovered judgment for the damages caused by said injury, defendant appealed based upon the trial court's charge to the jury. The trial court had instructed the jury that from defendant's violation of the Public Health Laws of New York, which prohibited the practice of medicine without a license, the jury might infer negligence which produced injury to the plaintiff.
DISCUSSION
- The appellate court reversed plaintiff's judgment because it found that the trial court had erred when it charged the jury that from the violation of the statute the jury might infer negligence which produced injury to the plaintiff.
- Unless the plaintiff's injury was caused by carelessness or lack of skill, the defendant's failure to obtain a license was not connected with the injury.
CONCLUSION
Judgment in favor of plaintiff was reversed.
Suggested Study Aids For Tort Law
No comments:
Post a Comment