Plante v. Charlotte Hungerford Hospital

How courts have described this case

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

• legislature established comprehensive prelitiga- tion inquiry, including requirement of opinion letter by objectively qualified health care provider, in attempt to reduce filing of frivolous medical malpractice actions
• “the plaintiffs . . . have abandoned their claims with respect to the individual defendants by raising them for the first time in their reply brief, which is an impermissible practice”
• ‘‘[T]he accidental failure of suit statute, now codified [at] § 52- 592, originally was enacted in 1862; Public Acts 1862, c. 14; see Baker v. Baningoso, 134 Conn. 382, 386, 58 A.2d 5 (1948
• acci- dental failure of suit statute was applicable to dismissal of medical malpractice action under General Statutes § 52-190a (c) for failure to supply opinion letter authored by similar health care provider, provided fail- ure was ‘‘[a] matter of form’’
• \[A] plaintiff's failure to comply with the requirements of [the certificate of merit statute] does not destroy the court's subject matter jurisdiction over the claim; it does not affect the power of the court to hear her medical malpractice action.\ (quotation omitted
• acci- dental failure of suit statute was applicable to dismissal of medical malpractice action under General Statutes § 52-190a (c) for failure to supply opinion letter authored by similar health care provider, provided fail- ure was ‘‘[a] matter of form’’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).