Legal Opinion
Claim of Tyson v. Roswell Park Cancer Institute Corp.
New York Court of Claims
Decided October 14, 2003No. Motion No. M-67061PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Michael E. Hudson, J.
This application for leave to file a late claim compels consideration of the relationship between Court of Claims Act § 10 and Public Authorities Law § 3567, as well as the procedure to be followed in the pursuit of a cause of action against Roswell Park Cancer Institute Corporation following the enactment of title 4 of article 10-C of the Public Authorities Law, the “Roswell Park Cancer Institute Corporation Act,” effective October 14, 1997.
Claimant seeks to file a claim for medical malpractice, alleging that the breast cancer first diagnosed by her…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- McDermott v. TorreNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Caselli v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Cimo v. State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1953
- Bay Terrace Cooperative Section IV, Inc. v. New York State Employees' Retirement System Policemen's & Firemen's Retirement SystemNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Santana v. New York State Thruway AuthorityNew York Court of Claims · 1977
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Holmes v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 2004
- Clark v. Roswell Park Cancer Institute Corp.New York Court of Claims · 2010
- Gibson v. Roswell Park Cancer Institute Corp.New York Court of Claims · 2008