Legal Opinion

Smith v. Steinberg

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided August 15, 1985PublishedCited by 41 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWilkins, J.

The defendant, an orthopedic surgeon, contends that his motion for summary judgment in this medical malpractice action should have been allowed because, as a member of the University of Massachusetts Medical School group practice, he is a “public employee” immune from liability under § 2 of G. L. c. 258 (1984 ed.) (the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act). The judge who denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment allowed the parties’ motion for a report of his order denying summary judgment. We granted the defendant’s motion for direct appellate review and now affirm the order denying…

2Cited by41 opinions

  1. McNamara v. HoneymanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1989
  2. Williams v. HartmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
  3. Chase v. INDEPENDENT PRACTICE ASSOCIATION, INCMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1991
  4. Krasnow v. AllenMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1990
  5. Hopper v. CallahanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1990

36 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