Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Gaston v. Parsons

864 P.2d 1319 (1994)

Case BriefQ&ARelatedOptions
From our private database of 22,300+ case briefs...

Gaston v. Parsons

Supreme Court of Oregon

864 P.2d 1319 (1994)

Facts

In 1987, Timothy Gaston (plaintiff) underwent a surgical procedure performed by William Parsons (defendant) to resolve muscle-spasm issues. Gaston was a partial quadriplegic and only had the use of his left arm. After the surgery, Gaston’s left arm became numb and did not function. Parsons assured Gaston that the issue was temporary and would last from 6 months to two years. Gaston did not regain the use of his left arm within two years following the surgery and brought an action against Parsons for negligence. The trial court granted Parson’s motion for summary judgment, holding that the statute of limitations barred Gaston’s claim. Gaston appealed, and the court of appeals reversed, holding that the statute of limitations did not begin to run until Gaston should have known of Parsons’s negligence. Parsons petitioned for review of the determination.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Unis, J.)

Dissent (Peterson, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 517,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 517,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 22,300 briefs, keyed to 984 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.

Questions and answers

Have a question about this case?

Sign up for a free 7-day trial and ask it

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 517,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 22,300 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership