Small v. Centocor, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that an individual who “had complete control over” a prior action and stood to gain financially “from a favorable outcome of the [prior] action” was “bound by the judgment in the prior action”
• holding that where the plaintiffs first cause of action was for medical malpractice and the second suit alleged fraud and deceit that arose from the patient’s hospitalization, the plaintiffs claims were “intextricably woven” and could have been determined in the first action
• holding that where the plaintiff's first cause of action was for medical malpractice and the second suit alleged fraud and deceit that arose from the patient's hospitalization, the plaintiff's claims were \intextricably woven\ and could have been determined in the first action
• applying a two-year limitations period to all claims, including fraud and constructive fraud, because “at the root of all the claims” was the medical care given to the plaintiff’s father

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).