green
Positive treatment
3.4 score
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Temporomandibular Joint (TMJ) Implant Recipients v. Dow Chemical Co.
See In re New York State Silicone Breast Implant Litig., 166 Misc.2d 299 , 632 N.Y.S.2d 953, 956-57 (Sup.Ct.1995) (remarking that if court were to hold that Dow Chemical assumed a duty of care to all potential consumers of silicone products, "the duty imposed on Dow Chemical would be indeterminate and infinite"), aff'd, 642 N.Y.S.2d 681 (App.Div.), appeal dismissed, 89 N.Y.2d 889 , 653 N.Y.S.2d 911 , 676 N.E.2d 493 (1996). 34 Absent the threshold requirement of a specific undertaking of the services that form the basis for Dow Chemical's alleged duty under section 324A, plaintiffs' claim must …
discussed
Cited "see"
Temporomandibular Joint (TMJ) Implant Recipients v. Dow Chemical Co.
See In re New York State Silicone Breast Implant Litig., 166 Misc.2d 299 , 632 N.Y.S.2d 953, 956-57 (Sup.Ct.1995) (remarking that if court were to hold that Dow Chemical assumed a duty of care to all potential consumers of silicone products, “the duty imposed on Dow Chemical would be indeterminate and infinite”), aff'd, 642 N.Y.S.2d 681 (App.Div.), appeal dismissed, 89 N.Y.2d 889 , 653 N.Y.S.2d 911 , 676 N.E.2d 493 (1996).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of New York State Silicone Breast Implant Litigation. Caroline E. Sorger
v.
Dow Chemical Corporation
v.
Dow Chemical Corporation
New York Court of Appeals.
Dec 19, 1996.
676 N.E.2d 493
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Motion for leave to appeal dismissed as untimely (see, CPLR 5513 [b]).