Legal Opinion

King v. Boettcher

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided July 26, 1994No. 102 and 103 M.D. Appeal Docket 1992PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

FLAHERTY, Justice.

The issue presented by this case is whether the Medical Professional Liability Catastrophe Loss Fund (the “CAT Fund”) created by the Health Care Services Malpractice Act, 40 P.S. § 1301.101 et. seq. (“the Act”), is liable for post-judgment interest when it fails to pay a judgment awarded against it when the judgment is due.

*576In the underlying medical malpractice action, Boettcher brought a wrongful death and a survival action against Dr. Robert L. King (“the doctor”) for the death of Boettcher’s wife, which occurred in the course of medical treatment…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Tominello v. JanewaySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Willet v. Pennsylvania Medical Catastrophe Loss FundSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  2. Mulligan v. PiczonCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1999
  3. Mulligan v. PiczonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
  4. Montgomery Hospital v. Medical Professional Liability Catastrophe Loss FundCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
  5. Montgomery Hospital v. Medical Professional Liability Catastrophe Loss FundCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996

4 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