Prohaska v. Sofamor, S.N.C.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that \[t]he fraud statute of limitations d[id] not apply [where the fraud claim was incidental to other causes of action]\
• holding that a cause of action exists under negligence per se when the underlying claim is for misbrand-ing or otherwise illegally omitting product warnings required by the FDCA
• finding fraudulent misrepresentation claim to be subject to same three-year statute of limitations as personal injury claims
• applying C.P.L.R. 214-c(2) to claims for physical harm resulting from defects in an internal fixation system implanted in the spine

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).