Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 New York opinions name it 1 courts 2004–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Moran v. Demarinisgreen1 sentence2010In any event, the medical records were properly admitted, as they were germane to the diagnosis and treatment of the decedent (see Bruce-Bishop v Jafar, 302 AD2d 345 [2003]; Moran v Demarinis, 152 AD2d 546, 547 [1989]). | 1 | 1 |
Pan v. Pangreen1 sentence2010The plaintiff waived any claim that the decedent’s medical records from Lenox Hill Hospital, with the exception of her autopsy report, should have been redacted, as the plaintiff submitted those records into evidence at the beginning of the trial and did not request that they be redacted until after the jury began deliberations (see Plantation House & Garden Prods. v R-Three Invs., 285 AD2d 539, 540 [2001]; see also People v Soberanis, 289 AD2d 343, 344 [2001]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Soberanisgreen1 sentence2010The plaintiff waived any claim that the decedent’s medical records from Lenox Hill Hospital, with the exception of her autopsy report, should have been redacted, as the plaintiff submitted those records into evidence at the beginning of the trial and did not request that they be redacted until after the jury began deliberations (see Plantation House & Garden Prods. v R-Three Invs., 285 AD2d 539, 540 [2001]; see also People v Soberanis, 289 AD2d 343, 344 [2001]). | 1 | 1 |
Arons v. Jutkowitzgreen1 sentence2008The plaintiff waived any privilege he might have to this information when he brought suit (see Arons v Jutkowitz, 9 NY3d 393, 415-416 [2007]). | 1 | 1 |
Brown v. Veterans Transportation Co.green1 sentence2004Co., 170 AD2d 638, 639 [1991]). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Nationstar Mtge., LLC v. Foltishen Inst.
green
1 sentence2025Here, since it is undisputed that Moshe conveyed his interest in the subject property to the appellant and that the plaintiff waived any claim to a deficiency judgment against Moshe, Moshe is not a necessary party to this foreclosure action ( see Nationstar Mtge., LLC v Foltishen Inst. , 199 AD3d 1011 ). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
U.S. Bank N.A. v. Davids
green
1 sentence2024Indeed, since the defendant transferred his entire interest in the subject property, and the plaintiff waived any claim for a deficiency judgment against him, the defendant no longer had any interest in the property and lacked standing to defend the action ( see U.S. Bank N.A. v Nur , 208 AD3d 708 ; Moret, LLC v NewBank , 194 AD3d 809 , 810; U.S. Bank N.A. v Davids , 188 AD3d 943, 944 ). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Augustin v. Augustin
green
1 sentence2020Bank, FSB v Campbell , 167 AD3d 712 , 715; Augustin v Augustin , 79 AD3d 651, 652 ; Calderock Joint Ventures, L.P. v Mitiku , 45 AD3d 452, 453 ). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Calderock Joint Ventures, L.P. v. Mitiku
green
1 sentence2020Bank, FSB v Campbell , 167 AD3d 712 , 715; Augustin v Augustin , 79 AD3d 651, 652 ; Calderock Joint Ventures, L.P. v Mitiku , 45 AD3d 452, 453 ). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Bruce-Bishop v. Jafar
green
1 sentence2010In any event, the medical records were properly admitted, as they were germane to the diagnosis and treatment of the decedent (see Bruce-Bishop v Jafar, 302 AD2d 345 [2003]; Moran v Demarinis, 152 AD2d 546, 547 [1989]). | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Roberts v. New York Hospital Medical Center of Queens
neutral
1 sentence2004Under these circumstances, the plaintiff waived any claim regarding noncompliance with the document demand contained in her notice for discovery and inspection (see Rodriguez v Sau Wo Lau, 298 AD2d 376 [2002]; Brown v Veterans Trans. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
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.