Legal Opinion

Linquito v. Siegel

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

Decided June 16, 2004PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

850 A.2d 537 (2004)

370 N.J. Super. 21

Philomena LINQUITO, as Executrix of the Estate of Arthur Linquito and Philomena Linquito, Individually, Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Respondent,

v.

Andrew L. SIEGEL, M.D., Defendant-Respondent/Cross-Appellant.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Argued May 18, 2004.

Decided June 16, 2004.

Bruce H. Nagel, Livingston, argued the cause for appellant/ cross-respondent (Nagel Rice & Mazie, attorneys; Mr. Nagel, on the brief).

David P. Weeks argued the cause for respondent/ cross-appellant (Ruprecht, Hart & Weeks, attorneys; Lopa N. Patel, on the brief).

Befor…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Jerry W. Canterbury v. William Thornton Spence and the Washington Hospital Center, a Body CorporateCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1972
  2. Scafidi v. SeilerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1990
  3. Verdicchio v. RiccaSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2004
  4. Perna v. PirozziSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1983
  5. Largey v. RothmanSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1988

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Hall v. FrankelColorado Court of Appeals · 2008
  2. Roukounakis v. MesserMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2005
  3. Shortino v. BunaNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2012
  4. Jandre v. Wisconsin Injured Patients & Families Compensation FundWisconsin Supreme Court · 2012
  5. Hall v. FrankelColorado Court of Appeals · 2008

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API