Abigail Ginsberg v. Quest Diagnostics, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing this principle and also holding that choice-of-law issues at times may be decided on a defendant-by-defendant basis
• recognizing the first step in our choice-of-law analysis is whether \an actual conflict of laws is present between the . . . states implicated in [the] case\ (emphasis added)
• finding New York law applied to defendants but remanding for continuation of proceedings in New Jersey
• explain- ing that “[p]rofessionals and their patients have a reasonable expectation that the laws of the state of licensure will govern the licensee’s activities within the state where the services are provided” and thus applying local law to medical malpractice
• conducting defendant-by- defendant analysis for substantive claims

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).