Berry v. St. Peter’s Hospital
New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
250 A.D.2d 63, 678 N.Y.S.2d 674 (1998)
- Written by Steven Pacht, JD
Facts
Cornelius Berry suffered permanent brain damage after undergoing a procedure at St. Peter’s Hospital (hospital) (defendant). As a result, Cornelius was receiving 24-hour nursing care at the hospital. Cornelius was insured by policies administered by the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (MetLife) and Lucent Technologies, Inc. (Lucent). Mary Berry (plaintiff), Cornelius’s wife, sued the hospital for medical malpractice. MetLife and Lucent initially asserted claims for equitable and legal subrogation regarding any medical expenses that Mary recouped from the hospital; MetLife and Lucent subsequently moved to intervene as of right pursuant to Civil Procedure Law and Rules (CPLR) § 1012 and by permission pursuant to CPLR § 1013. In the meantime, MetLife and Lucent refused to pay certain of Cornelius’s medical expenses, which resulted in separate, ongoing litigation in federal court. Both Mary and the hospital opposed intervention. The supreme court denied § 1012 intervention as of right but exercised its discretion to allow permissive intervention under § 1013. Mary and the hospital appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Carpinello, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
