Legal Opinion · Dissent

Rodriguez v. Manhattan Medical Group, P. C.

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

Decided March 27, 1990Published

1DissentCarro, J.

I respectfully dissent and would reverse the order of Supreme Court, reinstate the complaint and grant plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss the defendants’ affirmative defense raising a claim that the Statute of Limitations has expired.

This case presents us with the question of whether an intrauterine device (IUD), which had been intentionally inserted into plaintiff’s body by a nonparty, was transformed into a foreign object, by reason of defendants’ failure to remove it upon plaintiff’s request, and therefore subject, under CPLR 214-a, to the foreign object exception to the Statute of Limitations…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Flanagan v. Mount Eden General HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
  2. Goldsmith v. Howmedica, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1986
  3. Ogle v. De SanoIdaho Court of Appeals · 1984
  4. Ooft v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
  5. Newberry v. TarvinCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1980

7 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