In Stanhope v. L. A. Coll. of Chiropractic (1942) 54 Cal. App. 2d 141, a large object fell on the plaintiff and he was rushed to the College of Chiropractic which was only two blocks from his home. ( Stanhope, supra, 54 Cal. App. 2d at p. 143.) The plaintiff had never been to the college before and knew no one associated with it. (Ibid.) After taking X-rays, a physician told the plaintiff that there were no broken bones. (Ibid.) A few days later, additional X-rays were taken and it was discovered that the plaintiff actually had a broken vertebra. (Ibid.) The college argued that it was not liable because the radiologist was not its employee or agent. ( Id. at p. 144.) The Stanhope court relied on the theory of ostensible agency to reject that argument, reasoning: "So far as the record reveals the college did nothing to put the plaintiff on notice that the X-ray laboratory was not an integral part of the college, and it cannot seriously be contended that the plaintiff, when he was being carried from room to room suffering excruciating pain, should have inquired whether the individual doctors who examined him were employees of the college or were independent contractors. Agency is always a question of fact for the jury." ( Id. at p. 146.)