What is the test for determining whether a physician's failure to diagnose and treat a hip injury was the proximate cause of the injury?

Plaintiff disagrees, claiming "no particular percentage of cause need be established before the question properly is given to the jury." According to plaintiff, causation need be established only "by substantial, i.e., credible, evidence...." He relies in part on Burford v. Baker (1942) 53 Cal.App.2d 301, 127 P.2d 941, in which the defendant physician failed to diagnose a hip injury and advised the plaintiff to exercise his leg as much as possible. The injury healed improperly, and the plaintiff was permanently disabled. (Id., at pp. 304-305, 127 P.2d 941.) On appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff, the defendant claimed there was no evidence his negligence was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury because there was no evidence that proper

Page 615