Citing references
Opinions citing Bowman v. Davis, 356 N.E.2d 496 (Ohio 1976)
54 citing cases
-
651 N.E.2d 13 Ohio Court of AppealsDecember 21, 1994 Dissent
In Bowman v. Davis (1976), 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 2 O.O.3d 133 , 356 N.E.2d 496 , the Supreme Court of Ohio made some very significant points.
-
733 N.E.2d 1161 Ohio Supreme CourtSeptember 6, 2000
In Bowman v. Davis (1976), 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 2 O.O.3d 133 , 356 N.E.2d 496 , we first recognized a right for parents to recover where medical negligence resulted *579 in the birth of children.
-
614 N.E.2d 841 Ohio Court of AppealsNovember 18, 1992
Bowman v. Davis (1976), 48 Ohio St.2d 41, 45 , 2 O.O.3d 133, 135 , 356 N.E.2d 496, 499 .
-
812 N.E.2d 332 Ohio Court of AppealsJune 17, 2004
See Bowman v. Davis (1976), 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 2 O.O.3d 133 , 356 N.E.2d 496 ; Johnson, supra; Simmerer v.
-
623 N.E.2d 185 Ohio Court of AppealsJuly 8, 1993
.; Bowman v. Davis (1976), 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 2 O.O.3d 133 , 356 N.E.2d 496 , and in the case of a failed abortion, Harmath v. Goler (1990), 49 Ohio St.3d 62 , 550 N.E.2d 476 .
-
540 N.E.2d 1370 Ohio Supreme CourtJuly 5, 1989
Bowman v. Davis (1976), 48 Ohio St. 2d 41, 45 , 2 O.O. 3d 133, 135, 356 N.E. 2d 496, 499, fn. 3 . This court in Bowman , a five-to-two per curiam decision, clearly decided that Ohio recognizes a “wrongful pregnancy” action.
-
2000 Ohio 232, 733 N.E.2d 1169 Ohio Supreme CourtSeptember 6, 2000
According to the Simmerers, this court has already spoken on the issue of recovery of extraordinary expenses associated with a birth defect in a wrongful pregnancy case when it decided Bowman v. Davis (1976), 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 2 O.O.3d 133 , 356 N.E.2d 496 .
-
641 N.E.2d 280 Ohio Court of AppealsJune 9, 1994
Bowman v. Davis (1976), 48 Ohio St.2d 41, 46 , 2 O.O.3d 133, 135 , 356 N.E.2d 496, 499 . In Bowman , plaintiffs filed a complaint against Mrs.
-
671 N.E.2d 225 Ohio Supreme CourtOctober 10, 1996
See Bowman v. Davis (1976), 48 Ohio St.2d 41, 45 , 2 O.O.3d 133, 135 , 356 N.E.2d 496, 499, fn. 3 . A “wrongful birth” action is a claim brought by the parents of an impaired child seeking to recover damages for the birth of the child.
-
508 F. Supp. 544 D. South CarolinaJanuary 19, 1981
Tex.1976); Bowman v. Davis, 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 356 N.E.2d 496 (1976); Speck v. Finegold, 268 Pa.Super. 342 , 408 A.2d 496 (Pa.Super.1976).
-
428 A.2d 1366 Superior Court of PennsylvaniaAugust 24, 1981
Bowman v. Davis, 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 356 N.E.2d 496 (1976). On the other side of the spectrum are those jurisdictions which deny all damages when the alleged negligence leads to the birth of a normal child. Illustrative of these cases is Rieck v.
-
802 N.E.2d 723 Ohio Court of AppealsDecember 30, 2003
Hospitals of Cleveland, 44 Ohio St.3d at 51 , 540 N.E.2d 1370 ; see, also, Bowman v. Davis (1976), 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 2 O.O.3d 133 , 356 N.E.2d 496 . In Simmerer v.
-
343 S.E.2d 301 Supreme Court of VirginiaApril 25, 1986
[2] Some courts have stated that Bowman v. Davis, 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 356 N.E.2d 496 (1976), and Custodio v. Bauer, 251 Cal.App.2d 303 , 59 Cal.Rptr. 463 (1967), allow full recovery of child-rearing costs without any offset of the value of benefits received.
-
699 P.2d 459 Supreme Court of KansasMay 10, 1985
See Bowman v. Davis [ 48 Ohio St. 2d 41 , 356 N.E.2d 496 [1976)]. This goes too far. A child is more than an economic liability. A child may provide its parents with love, companionship, a sense of achievement, and a limited form of immortality.
-
746 P.2d 184 Supreme Court of OklahomaNovember 17, 1987
Rptr. 463 (1967); Bowman v. Davis, 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 356 N.E.2d 496 (1976). [2] Stills v. Gratton, 55 Cal. App.3d 698 , 127 Cal.
-
2005 Ohio 7078 Ohio Court of AppealsDecember 22, 2005 ConcurrenceUnpublished
Bowman v. Davis (1976), 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 44 , citing Kay v. Pennsylvania Rd. Co. (1952), 156 Ohio St. 503 . {¶ 22} In Bowman , the Ohio Supreme Court was considering a case involving a hospital consent form.
-
728 S.W.2d 738 Tennessee Supreme CourtApril 13, 1987
In Bowman v. Davis, 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 356 N.E.2d 496 (1976) (Per curiam), twins were involved, one normal and the other impaired. Bowman arose when a tubal ligation failed.
-
473 A.2d 429 Court of Appeals of MarylandApril 6, 1984
State, 94 Misc.2d 157 , 404 N.Y.S.2d 950 (Ct.Cl.1978); Bowman v. Davis, 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 356 N.E.2d 496 (1976); Hartke v.
-
314 S.E.2d 653 Supreme Court of GeorgiaApril 17, 1984
See Bowman v. Davis, 48 Ohio St. 2d 41 ( 356 NE2d 496 ) (1976).
-
505 A.2d 810 Supreme Judicial Court of MaineFebruary 27, 1986
Stillwater Clinic, 260 N.W.2d 169, 175 (Minn.1977); Bowman v. Davis, 48 Ohio St.2d 41, 45 , 356 N.E.2d 496, 499 (1976).
-
414 So. 2d 198 District Court of Appeal of FloridaJune 8, 1982
State, supra (same); Bowman v. Davis, 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 356 N.E.2d 496 (1976) (same); Anonymous v.
-
812 F.2d 1407 Third CircuitJanuary 13, 1987 Unpublished
See Bowman v. Davis, 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , ---, 356 N.E.2d 496, 498 (1976) (per curiam) (applying rules of construction for indemnity agreements to a case involving a waiver of liability); Hine v.
-
Ohio Court of AppealsJuly 7, 1999 Unpublished
Thus, in 1978, the Ohio Supreme Court wrote, in Bowman v. Davis , 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 46 "The choice not to procreate, as part of one's right to privacy, has become * * * a Constitutional guarantee.
-
332 S.E.2d 872 West Virginia Supreme CourtJuly 11, 1985
Perkel, 87 N.J. 53 , 432 A.2d 834 (1981); Bowman v. Davis, 48 Ohio St.2d 41 , 356 N.E.2d 496 , 2 O.O.3d 133 (1976); Speck v. Finegold, 497 Pa. 77 , 439 A.2d 110 (1981); Jacobs v. Theimer, 519 S.W.2d 846 (Tex.1975); Naccash v.