Legal Opinion

Woods v. Young

California Supreme Court

Decided April 4, 1991No. S005969PublishedCited by 223 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

KENNARD,J.

—In 1975, the Legislature enacted the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (MICRA) in response to a health care crisis caused by a rapid increase in premiums for medical malpractice insurance. Among MICRA’s many provisions is one that requires a plaintiff, before filing an action based on a health care provider’s professional negligence, to give the defendant at least 90 days’ notice of intent to sue.

The issue in this case is whether the 90-day notice provision tolls or extends the 1-year statute of limitations for medical malpractice actions,1 and, if so, under what…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Chevron Oil Co. v. HusonSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Dyna-Med, Inc. v. Fair Employment & Housing CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Nga Li v. Yellow Cab Co.California Supreme Court · 1975
  4. Moradi-Shalal v. Fireman's Fund Ins. CompaniesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  5. People v. WoodheadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987

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

3Cited by223 opinions

  1. Norgart v. Upjohn Co.California Supreme Court · 1999
  2. People v. GardeleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Chia-Lee Hsu v. AbbaraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  4. People v. WelchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
  5. Christensen v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991

218 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