HomeMy WebLinkAbout1220 2'~3'~2~.
• IN •r~i~: CIRCUIT COIJRT OF T~IL NINI:TEENTH Jt1DICIAI. ciHCViT or ri.ORIDA,
I\1 AND FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY
WII...LIAM RAY A1~1n4UNS, JR. , ) '
by his father and next friend,
WILLIANI RA1' AMMONS, and )
~VILLIANI RAY AiV1MONS, individually,
) -
Plaintiffs,
)
~ vs. CASE NO. 72-8?3
)
J. B. SULLIVAN and FORT PIERCE . ;
ME~VIORIAL HOSPITAL, INC. , ) PRE-TRIAL ORDER
Defendants. ) •
.
. _ TI~LS C~USF. coming on to be heard at the Pre-Trial Conference
and the Court having met with counsel for the respective parties, it is therefore
CO~SIDERED, ORDERED, AtiD ADJUDGED that this matter is set
for trial as the first case on Januar3~ 28, 1974, at 9:00 A. :Vl. That counsel for the ;
.
Plaintiff, in lieu of the necessity of counsel for the Defendant Sullivan propounding
interrogatories, would write a letter stating the opinions of the respective experts.
Drs. Lee J. Cordrey and John Feegel. _
1. That a statement of the case was agreed as follotivs: That this is
an action for damages braught by the Plaintiff, ~~4'ILLIAM RAI' AiVI~[ONS, for his
son WILLIA:~-I RAY A1rI1+IONS, JR. , for injuries which he received as a result of ?
the alleged negligence of the Defeadants, FORT PIERCE MENIORIAL HOSPITAL,
~
I~C. AND J. B. SL'•LLIVAN, or the joint negligence of both defendants.
2. The issues to be decided are the negligence, if any, of the
- ~
Defenc~ant, J. B. SULLN9N, and/or the Hospital and/or both. There is no question ~
of contributory negligence and there is no question therefore of comparative -
negligence, and such was stipulated by counsel for the respective parties.
3. That the Defendant Hospital's niotion to Dismiss is by stipulation
of counsel hereby considered to be a Nlotion to Strike the Claim of Res ipsa loquitur
and there being no objection by counsel, it is therefore ~
CnNSIDERED, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Defendant
IIospital's 14otion to Strike that part of the complaint relating to Res ipsa loquitur
- eoo~~223 ~ac~1~220 -