Davison v. Sinai Hosp. Of Baltimore, 617 F.2d 361 (4th Cir. 1980). · Go Syfert
Search
Davison v. Sinai Hosp. Of Baltimore, 617 F.2d 361 (4th Cir. 1980). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
72 citation events (32 in the last 25 years) across 20 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: DeBlois v. Corizon Health, Inc., No. 1:20-cv-01816, 2021 WL 3142003 (D. Md. July 23, 2021)
Treatment trajectory · 1980 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1980 2003 2026
How cited ↗
Cited for
At page 362 Determining applicability of state arbitration requirements in federal court6 citing cases
  • DeBlois v. Corizon Health, Inc., No. 1:20-cv-01816, 2021 WL 3142003 (D. Md. July 23, 2021).
    In fact, the defense “suggest[ed]” that the West Virginia requirement must control in federal court because in Davison v. Sinai Hosp. of Baltimore, Inc., 617 F.2d 361, 362 (4th Cir. 1980) (per curiam), the Fourth Circuit recognized the app…
  • Lorenzo Pledger v. Loretta Lynch, 5 F.4th 511 (4th Cir. 2021).published
    In Davison v. Sinai Hosp. of Balt., Inc., 22 617 F.2d 361, 362 (4th Cir. 1980) (per curiam), we affirmed the application of a Maryland pre-dispute arbitration requirement in federal court.
  • Lewis v. Waletzky, 576 F. Supp. 2d 732 (D. Md. 2008).published
    The Court is aware that in Davison v. Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Inc. the Fourth Circuit, inter alia, endorsed the reasoning of the District Court that the preconditions to suit required by the Maryland Health Claims Act are “substantive…
  • Charette v. Wexford Health Sources Inc., No. 1:19-cv-00033 (D. Md. Sept. 23, 2022).
    See Pledger v. Lynch, No. 18-2213 (4th Cir. Nov. 18, 2021) (Docket No. 66, Order). . 12 Davison v. Sinai Hosp. of Balt., Inc., 617 F.2d 361, 362 (4th Cir. 1980) (per curiam)).
  • Ford v. Pitt Cnty. Mem'l Hosp. Inc., No. 5:24-cv-00071 (E.D.N.C. Feb. 13, 2025).
    See, e.g., DiAntonio v. Northampton-Accomack Mem’l Hosp., 628 F.2d 287, 290 (4th Cir. 1980) and Davison v. Sinai Hosp. of Baltimore, Inc., 617 F.2d 361, 362 (4th Cir. 1980).
  • Rosario Rodriguez v. United States, No. 8:21-cv-00411 (D. Md. Aug. 8, 2022).
    Md. 2011); see also Davison v. Sinai Hosp. of Balt., Inc., 617 F.2d 361, 362 (4th Cir. 1980) (affirming district court’s dismissal of action on the ground that the HCMCA requires medical malpractice claims to be presented to arbitration as…
Other citing cases10 with no pin cite or quoted language on record
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ethel M. Davison and David Davison
v.
Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Inc., a Body Corporate, and Lionel Glassman, M.D. And Lionel Glassman & Associates, P.A. And Zoena A. Yannakakis, M.D.
79-1100.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Mar 27, 1980.
Published opinion
617 F.2d 361
1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 19166
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

617 F.2d 361

Ethel M. DAVISON and David Davison, Appellants,
v.
SINAI HOSPITAL OF BALTIMORE, INC., a Body Corporate, and
Lionel Glassman, M.D. and Lionel Glassman &
Associates, P.A. and Zoena A.
Yannakakis, M.D., Appellees.

No. 79-1100.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Argued Dec. 5, 1979.
Decided March 27, 1980.

Donald F. Oakley, Baltimore, Md. (Marvin Ellin, Jonathan Schochor, Ellin & Baker, Baltimore, Md., on brief), for appellants.

Angus R. Everton, Baltimore, Md. (E. Dale Adkins, III, Anderson, Coe & King, Alva P. Weaver, Baltimore, Md., on brief), for appellees.

Before WINTER, RUSSELL and HALL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

[*~361–362]1

The appellants appeal from the order of the district court dismissing, without prejudice, their medical malpractice diversity suit against the defendants. The district court held that the Maryland Health Care Malpractice Claims Act[1] precludes the bringing of this suit without first complying with the Maryland Health Care Malpractice Claims Act, which provides that the claim must first be presented to arbitration, and that compliance with this statute is a condition precedent to the bringing of the action. The appellants contend that the federal courts should not adopt a Maryland procedural rule which thwarts significant federal policies as a choice of law in diversity actions, and that the arbitration requirement of Maryland's Health Care Malpractice Claims Act, as a condition precedent to suit in federal court, unconstitutionally defeats diversity jurisdiction in medical malpractice litigation.

2

We agree with the resolution of these issues by the district court and affirm its dismissal of the action, without prejudice, on the well-reasoned opinion of the district court, Davison v. Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Inc., 462 F.Supp. 778 (D.Md.1978).[2] Judgment of the district court is accordingly

3

AFFIRMED.

1

Md. Courts and Judicial Proceedings Code Ann. §§ 3-2A-01 et seq. (Supp.1978)

2

See also Woods v. Holy Cross Hospital, 591 F.2d 1164 (5th Cir. 1979); Edelson v. Soricelli, 610 F.2d 131 (3d Cir. 1979); Seoane v. Ortho Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 472 F.Supp. 468 (E.D.La.1979)