This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
If it had been determined that a paper should be read on the most nebulous subject within the realm of Medical Jurisprudence, perhaps none could have been selected more obscure and undefined, than the one on which I am about to speak.
Undue influence in its medical and legal relations is my theme. This topic has been rendered cloudy by the manner in which the subject has been treated by lawyers and judges, and doctors and authors. It has not been relieved from the clouds of obscurity which surround it, by the learning and research of the judiciary of two continents. There has seemed to be a hesitancy on the part of the bar to give it any settled or uniform definition. That hesitancy has seemed to grow out of the difficulty of finding cases on this subject with uniform characteristics. It is the absence, or imperfection of correct definitions,
HULL AG. UNDUE INFLUENCE IN ITS RELATIONS TO MEDICAL JURISPRUDENCE. Read in the Section of Medical Jurisprudence, at the Thirty-Eighth Annual Meeting of the American Medical Association, June, 1887. JAMA. 1887;IX(14):421–428. doi:10.1001/jama.1887.02400130005001a
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: