8 New York opinions name it 3 courts 1973–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Gelbard v. Genesee Hospitalgreen1 sentence2025The product of this effort was section 2801-b of the Public Health Law" ( Gelbard , 87 NY2d at 695 [internal citations omitted] [emphasis added]; see also id . at 698 ["the PHC is a body of medical experts dedicated to the review of complex medical care issues , including issues related to the grant or denial of hospital staff privileges"] [emphasis added]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. DeJesusgreen1 sentence2018Based upon the testimony of the victim's physician at the hearing conducted pursuant to CPL 670.20 (1), moreover, the court properly determined that the victim was unavailable to testify at trial due to "illness and incapacity" and that the victim's conditional examination testimony could therefore be admitted in evidence at trial (CPL 670.10 [1]; see generally People v DeJesus , 110 AD3d 1480 , 1481 [4th Dept 2013], lv denied 22 NY3d 1155 [2014]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Bellgreen1 sentence2018Finally, we reject defendant's contentions that the persistent violent felony offender statute is unconstitutional ( see People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935, 936 [2010], cert denied 563 US 979 [*2][2011]), and that his sentence is unduly harsh and severe. | 1 | 1 |
Horn v. New York Timesgreen2 sentences2003Instead, we hold that a physician may claim an exception to New York’s employment-at-will doctrine based on an implied-in-law obligation of her employer to, at the very least, do nothing to prevent her from practicing medicine in compliance with the ethical standards of the medical profession” (Horn v New York Times, 293 AD2d 1, 3 [2002]). 2003Instead, we hold that a physician may claim an exception to New York's employment-at-will doctrine based on an implied-in-law obligation of her employer to, at the very least, do nothing to prevent her from practicing medicine in compliance with the ethical standards of the medical profession" ( Horn v New York Times, 293 AD2d 1, 3 [2002]). | 1 | 1 |
Guibor v. Manhattan Eye, Ear & Throat Hospital, Inc.green2 sentences1979(Guibor v Manhattan Eye, Ear & Throat Hosp., 46 NY2d 736 ; Fried v Straussman, 41 NY2d 376 ; Matter of Fritz v Huntington Hosp., 39 NY2d 339 .) The statutory procedure created by the Legislature through which a physician may challenge a termination or diminution of hospital privileges is a two-step process. 1979Hosp. , 210 App Div 204, 209 , affd 239 N.Y. 615 ; see, generally, Exclusion of or Discrimination *588 Against Physician or Surgeon by Hospital, Ann., 37 ALR3d 645, 659-661.) In 1972, the Legislature tempered the common-law rule by enacting section 2801-b of the Public Health Law which created an appeal mechanism for physicians who claim that they have been discriminated against or unjustly denied professional privileges or staff membership at a hospital. ( Guibor v Manhattan Eye, Ear & Throat Hosp. , 46 N.Y.2d 736 ; Fried v Straussman , 41 N.Y.2d 376 ; Matter of Fritz v Huntington Hosp. , 39 | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Gilbert-Mitchell v. Patterson
neutral
1 sentence2018Finally, we reject defendant's contentions that the persistent violent felony offender statute is unconstitutional ( see People v Bell , 15 NY3d 935, 936 [2010], cert denied 563 US 979 [*2][2011]), and that his sentence is unduly harsh and severe. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Wieder v. Skala
green
1 sentence2002Contrary to the contention of defendant The New York Times, we conclude that this holding is consistent with the exception to New York’s employment-at-will doctrine enunciated by the Court of Appeals in Wieder v Skala ( 80 NY2d 628 ), limiting a law firm’s unfettered right to discharge its associate on the basis of an implied-in-law obligation on the part of the firm to deal fairly and in good faith with the associate. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Cohoes Memorial Hospital v. Department of Health
green
1 sentence1995Hosp. v Department of Health (supra, 48 NY2d, at 588-589 ): "The statutory procedure created by the Legislature through which a physician may challenge a termination or diminution of hospital privileges is a two-step process. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Axelrod v. Sobol
green
1 sentence1994This statutory provision was designed to encourage those who were alleged victims of professional misconduct on the part of a physician to come forward without fear of disclosure so that appropriate investigations might be pursued (see, Matter of Axelrod v Sobol, 78 NY2d 112, 115 , supra). | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Van Campen v. Olean General Hospital
green
1 sentence1979Hosp. , 210 App Div 204, 209 , affd 239 N.Y. 615 ; see, generally, Exclusion of or Discrimination *588 Against Physician or Surgeon by Hospital, Ann., 37 ALR3d 645, 659-661.) In 1972, the Legislature tempered the common-law rule by enacting section 2801-b of the Public Health Law which created an appeal mechanism for physicians who claim that they have been discriminated against or unjustly denied professional privileges or staff membership at a hospital. ( Guibor v Manhattan Eye, Ear & Throat Hosp. , 46 N.Y.2d 736 ; Fried v Straussman , 41 N.Y.2d 376 ; Matter of Fritz v Huntington Hosp. , 39 | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Van Campen v. Olean General Hospital
green
1 sentence1979Hosp. , 210 App Div 204, 209 , affd 239 N.Y. 615 ; see, generally, Exclusion of or Discrimination *588 Against Physician or Surgeon by Hospital, Ann., 37 ALR3d 645, 659-661.) In 1972, the Legislature tempered the common-law rule by enacting section 2801-b of the Public Health Law which created an appeal mechanism for physicians who claim that they have been discriminated against or unjustly denied professional privileges or staff membership at a hospital. ( Guibor v Manhattan Eye, Ear & Throat Hosp. , 46 N.Y.2d 736 ; Fried v Straussman , 41 N.Y.2d 376 ; Matter of Fritz v Huntington Hosp. , 39 | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Fritz v. Huntington Hospital
green
2 sentences1979(Guibor v Manhattan Eye, Ear & Throat Hosp., 46 NY2d 736 ; Fried v Straussman, 41 NY2d 376 ; Matter of Fritz v Huntington Hosp., 39 NY2d 339 .) The statutory procedure created by the Legislature through which a physician may challenge a termination or diminution of hospital privileges is a two-step process. 1979Hosp. , 210 App Div 204, 209 , affd 239 N.Y. 615 ; see, generally, Exclusion of or Discrimination *588 Against Physician or Surgeon by Hospital, Ann., 37 ALR3d 645, 659-661.) In 1972, the Legislature tempered the common-law rule by enacting section 2801-b of the Public Health Law which created an appeal mechanism for physicians who claim that they have been discriminated against or unjustly denied professional privileges or staff membership at a hospital. ( Guibor v Manhattan Eye, Ear & Throat Hosp. , 46 N.Y.2d 736 ; Fried v Straussman , 41 N.Y.2d 376 ; Matter of Fritz v Huntington Hosp. , 39 | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Dubois v. . Decker
green
1 sentence1973(DuBois v. Decker, 130 N. Y. 325 .) There are also strong policy considerations for the maintaining of malpractice actions in our law and it may be that the unique status of a physician or other professional should not be considered in the same manner as a conventional employee. | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Matter of Parchefsky v. Kroll Bros., Inc.
green
1 sentence1973(Matter of Parchesky v. Kross Bros., 267 N. Y. 410 .) And the fact that a third party agrees to pay medical expenses does not absolve a physician from a claim in malpractice by the patient. | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.