Legal Opinion

Abbondanza v. Siegel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided November 16, 1994PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: These consolidated actions seek damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained by plaintiff husband as a result of his ingestion of the prescription medications Halcion and Xanax. Defendants include the three treating/prescribing physicians, Drs. Siegel, Weiss, and Cohen, and the manufacturer, Upjohn. Those defendants appeal from an order that, inter alia, denied their cross motions for an order disqualifying the law firm of Davidson, Fink, Cook & Gates from…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. T. C. Theatre Corp. v. Warner Bros. Pictures, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1953
  2. Greene v. GreeneNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
  3. In re HofAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  4. Silver Chrysler Plymouth, Inc. v. Chrysler Motors Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1973
  5. Colonie Hill, Ltd. v. DuffyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Ehrich v. Binghamton City School DistrictDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2002
  2. Hodgson, Russ, Andrews, Woods & Goodyear, LLP v. Isolatek International Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
  3. Morris v. MargulisAppellate Court of Illinois · 1999
  4. Credit Index, L.L.C. v. RiskWise Intl. L.L.C.New York Supreme Court · 2002
  5. Cavaliere v. Plaza Apartments, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011

2 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