This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: their $ 2,000 claim was based on the decedent's net worth and the fact that he had died leaving only collateral heirs. The court reversed the circuit court's judgment and remanded the case. The court held that the doctors could recover under an implied contract. Therefore, the jury instruction that the doctors were entitled to compensation based on their rendering professional services to decedent was proper. Neither did the circuit court have to compel the doctors to show the value of their services to the decedent. But the circuit court erred in allowing evidence of the decedent's financial condition, his marital status, or the identity of his heirs. Such evidence was irrelevant and may have been prejudicial. Whether or not an implied contract existed. Reversed and Cause remanded...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 06/15/2009 for the course LAW 577 taught by Professor Staff during the Spring '08 term at Arizona.
- Spring '08