■such carelessness or negligence of the plaintiff, her nurse or physician, or any person in charge of her, caused or contributed to the injuries alleged to have been sustained — provided you find that any were- sustained- — then the

A case of alleged malpractice is an illustration: A patient •sues his physician for injuries consequent upon unskilful or negligent treatment of his case, and the physician defeats his action by showing that the patient’s own negligence

But in such a case the negligence of the patient comes in to qualify, affect and change the treatment of the physician in which the negligence is to be found, and a remedy is denied, for the reason that the "two, by the act of the

A party seeking to recover for an injury must not have contributed to it in any degree, either by his negligence or the ■disregard of a duty imposed upon him by his physician, who, by his negligence, or want of care or skill, may also

If the contributory negligence of the patient united in producing the injuries complained of, the physician is not liable for damages therefor. Potter v. Warner, supra; McCandless v. McWha, supra; Scudder v.

negligence of the physician.

This was an action for damages against a physician and surgeon for alleged incompetency and negligence. Judgment passed for the defendant, and from that the plaintiff appeals.

The case was presented upon the theory that the party-sued had been guilty of negligence, and lacked skill as a physician and surgeon.

ordinary care to keep the parts together, and used ordinary care in the selection of surgeons and doctors, and nurses, if needed, and employed those of ordinary skill and care in their profession, and still by some unskillful or negligent

act of such nurses, or doctors or surgeons, the parts became separated, and the false joint was the result, appellant, if responsible for the breaking of the arm, ought to answer for the injury in the false joint.

But the law does not make him an insurer in such case that such surgeons or doctors, or nurses, will be guilty of no negligence, error in judgment, or want of care. " The liability to mistakes in curing is incident to a broken arm,

In the case at bar the testatrix’s cause of action was based on the unskilfulness and negligence of the appellant as a physician in professional attendance upon her during her sickness.

We think that a physician charged with negligence and unskilfulness in the practice of his profession is entitled to be advised of the specific acts of commission or omission which *165 constitute the negligence and unskilfulness

This was an action of case against a physician for negligence in the treatment of a fractured leg.

Was it such as was usually given by physicians of competent skill and care ? ' Or was it unskillful, inadequate and negligent ?

evidence of negligence and want of care.

The publication continues: “We think it high time that the community should understand the facts in the. case, after the matter has been talked about so much, and should suffer no more, either by the ignorance or negligence of any

of its physicians.

If they were truly ascribed, a jury might, perhaps, be justified in finding that the public health and safety .of the community had already suffered from the ignorance or negligence of *411 the plaintiff as a physician, or his' inability

Murphy was negligent in the performance of bis duty, — if you should find that from the evidence, — then you must determine whether Dr.

As I said before, if you find that these damages have been increased or aggravated on account of or through the negligence of the physician, under the instructions I have given you, or by reason of the negligence of the plaintiff himself

If you find that any portion of the damages to the plaintiff has been increased or aggravated by the negligence of the physician, or by the fault of the plaintiff himself, then the damages that have been shown to be occasioned to the

If in plaintiff’s case he erred in his treatment it does not prove that he was incompetent, or that it was negligence to appoint him.

This case shows that one doctor, of high reputation, may deem it unwise ever to wire a broken knee-cap, while another of equal ability thought it prudent to try the experiment.

This was an action at law, brought by the defendant in error, to recover damages of the plaintiff in error, who is a physician, for negligence and unskilfulness in the treatment of a sore on the inside of one of the cavities of the

The attempt to return to work too early made by the libelant was certainly unwise and injfirious, but I am not prepared to call it gross negligence.

The doctor did not recommend it; neither did ho forbid it, as he says himself: “I consented to his going, which certainly was a mistake.”

This is an action for damages caused by the negligence and unskilfulness of defendant as a physician and surgeon.

Miller, 13 Iowa, 128 , is authority for exemplary damages for gross negligence in a physician in treating a patient. See, also, Caldwell v. N. J. Steamboat Co., 47 N.

It is not contended but that the appellee exercised reasonable care and skill in the selection of physicians and surgeons to treat her. Terre Haute, etc., R. R. Co. v.

Buck, 96 Ind. 346; 2 Thompson Negligence, 1091, section 7; Rice v. City of Des Moines, 40 Iowa, 638 . It was proper, also, to show that the defect in the sidewalk was afterwards repaired.

When the plaintiff introduced evidence proving the receipt of the injury, and that it occurred by reason of the negligence of the defendant and without her fault or negligence contributing thereto, that she employed skilled physicians

There is no affirmative evidence that the - defendant was chargeable with any negligence.

On the contrary, all'of.the physicians, who testified upon the trial stated that the treatment of the injury by the defendant, as described by him and Dr.

single act of drunkenness would warrant a servant’s discharge ; as, for example, in the case of a minister of the gospel, where the act might bring personal reproach, and tends to degrade the moral standard of religion; or of a family physician

, where it might result in negligence; or malpractice in pharmacy or surgery. — Wood on Master and Servant, § 111, p. 213.

The question put to the plaintiff upon his examination as a witness in his own behalf called for an expression of his opinion as to the damage he had sustained in consequence of the defendant’s negligent and unskillful professional

treatment of him as his physician and surgeon.

That judgment was held conclusive against the plaintiff who sued for damages resulting from unskilled and negligent treatment by said physician in the services for which the judgment was confessed: Gates v. Preston, 41 N.

The words complained of impute negligence to the plaintiff in his profession as a physician.