Angrand v. Fox

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that medical malpractice action filed prior to the expiration of the statutory ninety-day screening and investigation period should have been abated instead of dismissed with prejudice
• deciding that where the only alleged defect in the complaint was that it was filed too soon, dismissal would serve no purpose other than to benefit the clerk by requiring the payment of additional fees
• premature filing of medical malpractice claim before end of 90 days notice was not fatal as claim could be abated
• premature filing of medical malpractice claim before lapse of 90 days notice provision not fatal to action, which could be abated; subsequent lapse of limitations period precludes dismissal of action on account of premature filing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).