Legal Opinion
Catherwood v. American Sterilizer Co.
New York Supreme Court
Decided January 24, 1986PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Joseph D. Mintz, J.
In response to plaintiffs’ motion to add Donna Patterson as *873a party plaintiff on behalf of the estate of Rebecca Lee Patterson, defendants cross-move for dismissal of any cause of action on behalf of Rebecca Lee Patterson under CPLR 3211, for failure to state a cause of action. Briefly, the facts as alleged are as follows: Donna Patterson, while an employee of defendants Harmac Industries and Extracorporeal Medical Specialties, claims to have been exposed to ethylene oxide (hereinafter called EtO). Rebecca Lee Patterson was conceived subsequent to Donna…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Codling v. PagliaNew York Court of Appeals · 1973
- Becker v. SchwartzNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- Tobin v. GrossmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
- Woods v. LancetNew York Court of Appeals · 1951
- Victorson v. Bock Laundry Machine Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1975
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Taylor v. CutlerNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1997
- Ruffing v. Union Carbide Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Enright v. Eli Lilly & Co.New York Supreme Court · 1988
- Enright v. Eli Lilly & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Catherwood v. American Sterilizer Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.