Carter’s doctor, who also said that the x-rays and analysis as of indicated a slight degenerative disc disease at C-5 and 6, but that at that time “there was no reason for a prognosis of any necessary or possible surgical repair. However, if the dog, unknown to either party, was rabid at the time, and plaintiff later developed rabies, the settlement certainly should be set aside for the reason that the real injury was not known at the time of settlement and there was a mutual mistake of fact. There is evidence to support either claim, and I believe the trial court erred in granting a summary judgment in the case. Carter must have considered the diagnosis, and significantly stated in her own affidavit that at the time of the release she was aware of the injury, believing it was merely a severe neck strain, but was unaware of the nature or extent of her injury. A herniated disc is not the same injury as is a contusion to the cervical spine.
He, like the appellant in the instant matter, sought to set aside the settlement and to have a trial on the merits of the case. Child, 8 Utah 2d , P. Johana had informed me that all x-rays taken of my neck and shoulders were normal. Obviously the meaning of the statement is that the author of the concurring opinion assumes that the appellant knew what the doctor knew. His research interest lies broadly in computational biology with a focus on genetic variation.
Home | Green Print Centre
hinding She is especially interested in elucidating the biological mechanisms behind the differences in gene regulation between different cell types. Merrill, footnote one main opinion, the principle of which I think is applicable here and consistent with the decision of this Court in the instant case.
The appellant is awarded costs. Prior to that, he received dual B. At Stanford, she developed methods to analyze novel high-throughput sequencing datasets to better understand the roles of DNA methylation and Cys2-His2 zinc finger transcription factor binding in transcriptional regulation.
Graduates Alumni Profiles Join Us!
Her doctor, on the day of the event, diagnosed her injuries as a “cervical contusion” or cervical strain, strain of the left shoulder and superficial abrasions.
He settled his cause of action with the insurance carrier and signed a release containing the following language:.
Current Lane Fellows
His doctoral research focused on the development of robust kernel methods for learning and mining on noisy and complex graph and hypergraph data. His research interest lies broadly in computational biology with a focus on genetic variation.
Irene is interested in developing computational approaches to integrate biological datasets in ways that will provide a more detailed understanding of transcriptional regulation. During his undergraduate studies, he conducted research on the development and application of stochastic optimization algorithms.
The fact is, as she states in her affidavit: If infection sets in and the leg has to be amputated, the settlement cannot be set aside. Carter’s doctor, who also said that the x-rays and analysis as of indicated a slight degenerative disc disease at C-5 and 6, but that at that time “there was no reason for a prognosis of any necessary or possible surgical repair. In the Reynolds case, x-rays were taken and treatment received from a doctor.
Yates we stated that: I think this is in agreement with the decision of Justice Ellett in Reynolds v.
Merrill which appears to be in point. Before moving to Arizona Dan received his B. In the instant case the diagnosis was, at the time of the accident, “a cervical strain, strain of the left shoulder and superficial abrasions,” according to Mrs. Of or relating to a neck. We are not here concerned with the question of when the plaintiff’s disc was herniated.
We are of the opinion that the trial judge’s memorandum decision was and is well taken and reflects the law espoused in Reynolds, as applied to the facts of this case when he says: It cannot reasonably and fairly be assumed otherwise than that she did so in awareness of the result of her examination and treatment in the hospital and her doctor’s advice concerning her condition, including the fact that the x-rays showed “a slight degenerative disc disease” of her cervical vertebra.
The parties believed at the time of settlement that the plaintiff had contusions to the cervical spine and settled for that injury.
Carter v. Kingsford
This Court reversed that judgment and in doing so, said:. Affirmed, with costs to Kingsford. Where the parties know what the injury is, they should bknding free to agree to a settlement each bearing whatever risk may be involved in a better or worse recovery from the particular known injury.
Gary Christian, Salt Lake City, for defendants and respondents.
Current Lane Fellows | Computational Biology Department
It is my opinion that this is a sound and necessary policy, not only because fairness to both parties demands it, but to the extent such settlements and releases may be set aside because things didn’t turn out just as expected, they are rendered insecure; and therefore parties will be reluctant to enter into them. Heewook received his B. Hamim received his Ph.
It later turned out that he had a spinal fusion which he claimed was necessitated by his injuries. She then went to graduate school at Stanford University, where she received her Ph.