Chapman v. Schultz
Alice Chapman v. John H. Schultz
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Order reversed, with costs, and motion denied. Memorandum: The issues presented on this appeal are identical with those before the court in Ziemba v. Sternberg (45 A D 2d 230). In accordance with our holding therein, the order of Special Term, made prior to that decision, should be reversed and defendant’s motion denied. All concur, Mahoney, J. under the constraint of Ziemba v. Sternberg (supra) (Appeal from order of Monroe Special Term in medical malpractice action.) Present — Marsh, P. J., Moule, Mahoney, Del Vecchio and Witmer, JJ.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.