[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
December 13, 1902

OSTEOPATHIC LAW.

JAMA. 1902;XXXIX(24):1529. doi:10.1001/jama.1902.02480500035006

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.

Abstract

A Missouri judge has recently given a medicolegal decision that it seems to us will hardly stand the revision of the higher courts. It is in effect that in cases of malpractice the testimony only of physicians of the same alleged school of practice as the medical party in the case can be accepted. The case in court was one against one of the osteopathic Stills of Kirksville, Mo., and the judge ruled that the study of one school of medicine did not qualify a practitioner to give an intelligent opinion on the work of one of another school. Osteopathy is thus impregnably fortified by this Missouri decision as long as it stands, a fact that is worth advertising for the benefit of those who may propose to submit themselves to osteopathic massage. If they do not get satisfaction from the operation or treatment they need not expect to get

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×