Barnard v. Thompson
Cases that cite this one
30 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Nichols v. Smith (Tex. App. 1973)
- Borderlon v. Peck (Tex. 1983)
- Robinson v. Weaver (Tex. 1977)
- Sparger v. Worley Hospital, Inc. (Tex. 1977)
- Peralta v. Martinez (N.M. Ct. App. 1977)
- Sera Linke v. A. R. Sorenson and R. Sorenson (8th Cir. 1960)
- Harle v. Krchnak (Tex. App. 1967)
- Albert Lujan D/B/A Texas Wholesale Flower Co. v. Navistar, Inc., Navistar International Corporation, Navistar International Transportation Corp., International Truck and Engine Corporation and Santex Truck Centers, Ltd. (Tex. App. 2015)
- Dewayne Rogers Logging, Inc. v. Propac Industries, Ltd. (Tex. App. 2009)
- Dewayne Rogers Logging, Inc. v. Propac Industries, Ltd., East Texas Machinery Rental, Inc. and Deere & Company, D/B/A John Deere Company (Tex. App. 2009)
- Dewayne Rogers Logging, Inc. v. Propac Industries, Ltd., East Texas Machinery Rental, Inc. and Deere & Company, D/B/A John Deere Company (Tex. App. 2009)
- HTM Restaurants, Inc. v. Goldman, Sachs & Co. (Tex. App. 1990)
- Stephens v. James (Tex. App. 1984)
- Dotson v. Alamo Funeral Home (Tex. App. 1979)
- Huizar v. Four Seasons Nursing Centers of San Antonio (Tex. App. 1978)
- Sheldon Independent School District v. M. L. Hudson Electric Co. (Tex. App. 1978)
- Whatley v. National Bank of Commerce (Tex. App. 1977)
- Nardone v. Reynolds (Fla. 1976)
- Allen v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp. (District Court, S.D. Texas 1974)
- Nichols v. Smith (Tex. 1974)
- Tarkington v. Beneficial Finance Co. of Port Arthur (Tex. App. 1974)
- Raney v. Mack (Tex. App. 1973)
- Jerry W. Canterbury v. William Thornton Spence and the Washington Hospital Center, a Body Corporate (D.C. Cir. 1972)
- Hays v. Hall (Tex. App. 1972)
- Wilkinson v. Harrington (R.I. 1968)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the Commission of Appeals, Section A.
This is a suit by J. B. Thompson against Dr. W. C. Barnard and two other physicians, constituting a partnership. The suit *279 was commenced December 6, 1935, and its object is the recovery of damages resulting from the negligence of the defendants which occurred in connection with a surgical operation performed by them on Delia Thompson, the wife of the plaintiff. The operation was performed on January 6, 1930. In proper performance of the operation, the surgeon made an incision in Mrs. Thompson’s abdomen and inserted a number of gauze sponges in the abdomen. The surgeon negligently failed to remove two of the gauze sponges from the abdomen and they remained there after the operation was concluded and the incision closed. The fact that the gauze had been left inside her body was not discovered by Mrs. Thompson until June 27, 1935, six months before this suit was commenced. The discovery occurred when a second operation was performed by a different surgeon. All these facts appear in the plaintiff’s petition. The defendants, by special exception, invoked the statute of two years limitation, (Article-5526). The trial court sustained the special exception and dismissed the suit. The Court of Civil Appeals reversed the judgment of the trial court and remanded the cause. 142 S. W. (2d) 238.
The action of the Court of Civil Appeals is correct, for the reason that the plaintiff’s petition contains a paragraph which reads as follows:
“Plaintiff alleges that during said operation and at any and all times after said operation the defendants herein, well knowing of the presence of said gauze in the body of plaintiff’s said wife, fraudulently concealed from plaintiff and plaintiff’s said wife the presence of said gauze sponges which they had placed in the body of the said Delia Thompson, and fraudulently concealed from them the necessity of removing the same.”
The defendant made no complaint in the trial court, by special exception or otherwise, of any defect of form in respect to this paragraph. It is sufficient as a pleading to tender the issue of fraudulent concealment by the defendants of the plaintiff’s cause of action from the time it arose until the gauze sponge was discovered in Mrs. Thompson’s body on July 27, 1935. Owen v. King, 130 Texas 614, 111 S. W. (2d) 695.
The judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals reversing the trial court’s judgment and remanding the cause is affirmed.
Opinion adopted by the Supreme Court January 7, 1942.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.