Cotnam v. Wisdom
Supreme Court of Arkansas
83 Ark. 601, 104 S.W. 164 (1907)
- Written by Christine Hilgeman, JD
Facts
The decedent, A.M. Harrison, was thrown from a street car and suffered serious injuries that rendered him unconscious. F.L. Wisdom and another surgeon (plaintiffs) were asked by a passerby to assist Harrison. They performed a complicated surgery to try to save his life, but he died without ever regaining consciousness. T.T. Cotnam (defendant), as administrator of Harrison’s estate, refused to pay Wisdom and the other surgeon for their services, claiming that Harrison, who was unconscious when the surgeons treated him, could not have assented to the treatment provided. The trial court instructed the jury that if the evidence showed that Wisdom and the other surgeon provided professional services to Harrison in an emergency context, then the estate should be found liable to plaintiffs for the reasonable value of those services, and that the jury could consider the ability of the decedent to pay in determining the reasonable charge for the professional services rendered. The jury found in favor of Wisdom and the other surgeon. Cotnam appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hill, C.J.)
Concurrence (Battle and Wood, J.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 788,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
