Legal Opinion
Berry v. St. Peter's Hospital
New York Supreme Court
Decided May 29, 1997PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Joseph Harris, J.
The context of this motion is a medical malpractice action in which Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (hereinafter Metropolitan or Met Life) and Lucent Technologies, Inc. (hereinafter Lucent) move to intervene as plaintiffs, pursuant to CPLR 1012, or, alternatively, CPLR 1013, to protect their subrogation rights against plaintiff and defendants. The plaintiff and defendants all oppose the motions to intervene.
FACTS
The facts underlying this motion are as follows. In September 1983, plaintiff’s conservatee, Cornelius Berry (hereinafter *217Berry), was admitted…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- In re the Estate of BarabashNew York Court of Appeals · 1972
- Teichman v. Community Hospital of Western SuffolkNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
- Simpson v. . Foundation Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1911
- Winkelmann v. Excelsior InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1995
- MATTER OF SCHULZ v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Blue Cross & Blue Shield of New Jersey, Inc. v. Philip Morris, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2000
- Berry v. St. Peter's HospitalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Nossoughi v. Federated Department Stores, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1998
- Hoffmann v. S. J. Hawk, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1998
- Range v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.District Court, W.D. New York · 1997
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.