From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gilbert v. Klar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 28, 1928
223 App. Div. 200 (N.Y. App. Div. 1928)

Opinion

March 28, 1928.

Appeal from Supreme Court of Erie County.

Charles W. Strong, for the appellant.

Gibbons Pottle [ Frank Gibbons of counsel], for the respondent.


Appeal from an order directing plaintiff to appear before a designated doctor, who is roentgenologist at the Millard Fillmore Hospital in Buffalo, N.Y., and to permit an X-ray "photograph" to be taken of his right elbow. While the decisions of the State courts on the point are conflicting, we are of the opinion that the order should be affirmed. A physician or surgeon designated by the court or judge to make a physical examination of the plaintiff should be permitted, under such restrictions and directions as shall seem proper, to employ such means as are in common use in the profession. We may take judicial notice that the X-ray is in common use and that the science and art thereof have been developed to a point where, in the hands of specialists, there is little or no danger.

The order should be affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

All concur. Present — HUBBS, P.J., CLARK, CROUCH, TAYLOR and SAWYER, JJ.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.


Summaries of

Gilbert v. Klar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 28, 1928
223 App. Div. 200 (N.Y. App. Div. 1928)
Case details for

Gilbert v. Klar

Case Details

Full title:FRANCIS GILBERT, Appellant, v. HARRY KLAR, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Mar 28, 1928

Citations

223 App. Div. 200 (N.Y. App. Div. 1928)
228 N.Y.S. 183

Citing Cases

Mitchell v. Pure Oil Co.

To do otherwise would be stepping backward. The decisions of the New York state courts seem to be in accord…