Legal Opinion

Maruca v. Standard

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided June 15, 1989No. 7122PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJacobson, J.

This is an appeal from the granting of the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. The plaintiffs claim that the court erred in granting the motion because it decided a material issue of fact. We agree.

In her complaint, the plaintiff1 alleged that in August, 1972, the defendant surgeon, John Standard, performed surgery to remove a benign tumor from her left parotid gland. She alleged that during the operation the defendant inadvertently ruptured the tumor and failed to inform her of the rupture. She alleged that, as a result of the rupture, the tumor “seeded,” causing other tumors. The…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Strada v. Connecticut Newspapers, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
  2. Catz v. RubensteinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
  3. Barnes v. SchleinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
  4. Craftsmen, Inc. v. YoungConnecticut Appellate Court · 1989
  5. Rotophone, Inc. v. Danbury HospitalConnecticut Appellate Court · 1988

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Campbell v. PalmerConnecticut Appellate Court · 1990
  2. Siudyla v. ChemExec Relocation Systems, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1990
  3. Boll v. Schendleholz, No. 097177 (Apr. 16, 1992)Connecticut Superior Court · 1992
  4. Nardozzi v. Bank of Boston Connecticut, No. 090799 (Apr. 23, 1992)Connecticut Superior Court · 1992
  5. Szymanski v. Hartford Hospital, No. Cv 89 03 63 831s (Mar. 17, 1993)Connecticut Superior Court · 1993

1 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