127 Iowa 456 | Iowa | 1905
In a general way, objection is made to the instructions given, but an examination of them leads to the conclusion that they were without material error. The court did not, as counsel for appellant assumes, allow the jury to find for the plaintiff on the theory that the X-ray treatment was not proper for appendicitis, but, as we read the instructions, limited the jury to consideration of the question whether the method used in applying the treatment was improper and negligent.
There was not a want of proof of freedom from con
For the error pointed out, the judgment should be reversed. We have not elaborated the questions presented, for the reason that we are without an argument for appellee, and therefore think it sufficient to state our conclusions-
Reversed.