Legal Opinion
Pharr v. Cortese
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 27, 1990PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*1079OPINION OF THE COURT
Stanley L. Sklar, J.
The issue presented is whether New York should recognize intentional spoliation of evidence as a tort when it is alleged that a physician falsified his records in order to avoid malpractice liability. The court declines to recognize spoliation of evidence as a tort under the facts of this case.
FACTS
The plaintiff, Doris Pharr, brought a malpractice action against Dr. Córtese, a breast cancer specialist, and other doctors, for failure to properly diagnose and treat breast cancer. Pharr now claims that Dr. Córtese falsified medical records in order to…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hazen v. Municipality of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 1986
- In re the Probate of the Last Will & Testament of EnoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921
- In re Proving the Last Will & Testament of EnoNew York Surrogate's Court · 1922
3Cited by10 opinions
- Hirsch v. General Motors Corp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1993
- Baugher v. Gates Rubber Co., Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1993
- Weigl v. Quincy Specialties Co.New York Supreme Court · 1993
- MetLife Auto & Home v. Joe Basil Chevrolet, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Fada Industries, Inc. v. Falchi Building Co.New York Supreme Court · 2001
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.