Legal Opinion
Karen v. State
New York Court of Claims
Decided November 6, 1981No. Claim No. 65358; Claim No. 65489; Claim No. 65524PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Frank S. Rossetti, J.
Motions are granted and the three claims are hereby dismissed, in accordance with the following.
The Karen and Hudak claims are identical (they were prepared by the same attorneys, said claimants’ attorneys herein) and are for false arrest and malicious prosecution. The Roth claim (prepared by different attorneys) is for malicious prosecution, prima facie tort and violation of civil rights.
*397All three claims arise from a December 5, 1978 indictment of the claimants and five other doctors by a Nassau County Grand Jury for alleged violations of this State’s…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Broughton v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- Boose v. City of RochesterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
- Marks v. . TownsendNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Lincoln First Bank v. SiegelAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1977
- Whitmore v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Newton v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2008
- Coakley v. JaffeDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1999
- Bonner v. GuccioneDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- Benjamin v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1982
- Martin v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 2000
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.