Legal Opinion
Cotroneo v. Pilney
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided February 3, 1984No. C8-83-388PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TODD, Justice.
Joan Cotroneo commenced a medical malpractice action against Dr. Frank J. Pil-ney 1 alleging negligence and lack of informed consent. Prior to trial, Cotroneo limited her cause of action to lack of informed consent. Her physician withdrew as a witness shortly before trial was to commence. Cotroneo then obtained medical testimony on the issue of negligence. The trial court dismissed the action upon the conclusion that, based on previous trial court orders, it had no choice in the matter. Because of the unusual facts of the case and the provisions of Minn.R.Civ.P. 16, we reverse…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- United States v. First National Bank of CircleCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1981
- Cornfeldt v. TongenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Rice v. PerlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- Sandhofer v. Abbott-Northwestern HospitalSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
- Gebhard v. NiedzwieckiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1963
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Bohdan v. Alltool Mfg., Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
- In Re IrwinCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995
- LOL Finance Co. v. Romain Corp.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
- Patterson v. Wu Family Corp.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999
- Poncin v. ArltCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1988