Legal Opinion
Dillenbeck v. Hess
New York Court of Appeals
Decided February 23, 1989PublishedCited by 210 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Alexander, J.
In Koump v Smith (25 NY2d 287), we noted that a litigant does not waive the physician-patient privilege merely by defending a personal injury action in which his or her mental or physical condition is in controversy unless, in so defending, the litigant "affirmatively asserts the condition either by way of counterclaim or to excuse the conduct complained of by the plaintiff” (id., at 294). Today, we hold that where a party defending a personal injury action validly asserts the privilege and has not affirmatively placed his or her medical condition in issue,…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Whalen v. RoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Koump v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
- Edington v. . Mutual Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Prink v. Rockefeller Center, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1979
- Davis v. . Supreme Lodge, Knights of HonorNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by210 opinions
- Chanko v. American Broadcasting Companies, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2016
- Arons v. JutkowitzNew York Court of Appeals · 2007
- Forman v. HenkinCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 2018
- Roca v. PerelAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Green v. MontgomeryNew York Court of Appeals · 2001
205 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.