Pink v. Slater

DRAPEAU, J.

Plaintiff employed defendant, a medical doctor, to remove scars from her face and nose. When she got through with the plastic surgery her appearance was worse than when she started. Infection followed the operation to remove one of the scars. Hence this action for malpractice.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment for defendant, based upon findings by the trial judge.

Plaintiff contends that there was substantial evidence to support her case.

But it may be inferred from the testimony of the defendant doctor that the infection was not due to negligence, and that he used a recognized and approved method of practice. And there was no testimony of any medical witness that there was negligence. Therefore, the record supports the findings and the judgment.

Generally the propriety or impropriety of particular medical treatment can be established only by expert medical testimony.

(Moore

v.

Belt,

34 Cal.2d 525 [212 P.2d 509];

Church

v.

Bloch,

80 Cal.App.2d 542 [182 P.2d 241].)

Plaintiff argues that it was error to discharge the jury after the trial had begun.

The jury had been called at-defendant’s request. During the trial he notified the court that he did not desire the further attendance of the jury. Plaintiff was then offered the right to assume the jury, which she waived.

This was a sufficient waiver of the jury, under section 631 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

(Glogau

v.

Hagan,

107 Cal.App.2d 313 [237 P.2d 329].) Moreover, a party cannot without objection try his case before a court without a jury, lose it and then complain that it was not tried by jury.

(Smith

v.

Brannan,