§Why CasetextPricing

Lisa M. Oakes, Individually and as Executrix of the Estate of Daniel C. Oakes, Deceased, Respondent,v.Rajnikant Patel, M.D., et al., Appellants.

Brief

54 Cited authorities

  1. In re Aho

    39 N.Y.2d 241 (N.Y. 1976)   Cited 4,325 times

    Argued January 16, 1976 Decided April 6, 1976 Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, ELBERT T. GALLAGHER, J. Richard C. Welden for appellant. Daniel G. Donovan and Gerald Nolan for respondents. JONES, J. We hold that the attorneys who represented this alleged incompetent in the proceedings which resulted in the adjudication of her incompetency had authority to prosecute the appeal from such adjudication and therein to seek review of the denial of

  2. Cohen v. Hallmark Cards

    45 N.Y.2d 493 (N.Y. 1978)   Cited 1,944 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the standard of review in assessing a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is whether there is "simply no valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which could possibly lead rational [people] to the conclusion reached by the jury on the basis of the evidence at trial"

  3. Majauskas v. Majauskas

    61 N.Y.2d 481 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 585 times
    Holding that vested rights in a noncontributory pension plan are marital property to the extent they were acquired between the date of marriage and commencement of a matrimonial action

  4. Hartford Insurance Company v. County of Nassau

    46 N.Y.2d 1028 (N.Y. 1979)   Cited 379 times
    Holding that an unexplained two month delay in disclaiming coverage was unreasonable as a matter of law

  5. Whalen v. Kawasaki Motors Corp.

    92 N.Y.2d 288 (N.Y. 1998)   Cited 126 times
    Adopting the "settlement-first" method of reducing the verdict by first reducing the verdict by the amount of the settlement and then applying N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1411 to discount the remainder by the proportion of plaintiff s comparative negligence

  6. Rokina Optical Co. v. Camera King, Inc.

    63 N.Y.2d 728 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 165 times
    Holding that "a defendant whose answer is stricken as a result of a default admits all traversable allegations in the complaint, including the basic allegation of liability, but does not admit plaintiff's conclusion as to damages"

  7. Adams v. Genie Indus

    2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 4022 (N.Y. 2010)   Cited 77 times
    Confirming that the standard set forth in Voss v. Black & Decker [Mfg.] Co., 59 N.Y.2d 102 applies to both strict products liability and negligence claims

  8. Reed v. City of New York

    304 A.D.2d 1 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)   Cited 90 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Reed there was no indication that the plaintiff had been engaged in an ambitious or personally rewarding career, nor that she had harbored a "true goal" of motherhood that her injuries now precluded.

  9. Koken v. Reliance Ins. Co.

    586 Pa. 269 (Pa. 2006)   Cited 65 times
    Holding that the term "shall" is mandatory for purposes of statutory construction when the statute is unambiguous

  10. J.R. Loftus, Inc. v. White

    85 N.Y.2d 874 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 64 times
    Holding that the "general measure of damages for the plaintiff . . . is expectancy damages"