Home/New York Court of Appeals/Fleishman v. Eli Lilly & Co.

Fleishman v. Eli Lilly & Co.

473 N.E.2d 764, 63 N.Y.2d 1017, 484 N.Y.S.2d 536, 1984 N.Y. LEXIS 4763
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedNovember 15, 1984
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 473 N.E.2d 764 (Fleishman v. Eli Lilly & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Fleishman v. Eli Lilly & Co., 473 N.E.2d 764, 63 N.Y.2d 1017, 484 N.Y.S.2d 536, 1984 N.Y. LEXIS 4763 (N.Y. 1984).

Opinion

Motion to amend remittitur granted. Return of the remittitur requested and, when returned, it will be amended by adding thereto the following: Upon the appeal herein, there was presented and necessarily passed upon a question under the Constitution of the United States, viz.: whether plaintiff was deprived of due process and equal protection of the laws by the holding that plaintiff’s causes of action accrued and the Statute of Limitations commenced to run upon exposure to the harmful drug. (See 62 NY2d 888.)

Judges Meyer and Kaye taking no part.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Gianotti
813 A.2d 280 (Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, 2002)
Consorti v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.
657 N.E.2d 1301 (New York Court of Appeals, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
473 N.E.2d 764, 63 N.Y.2d 1017, 484 N.Y.S.2d 536, 1984 N.Y. LEXIS 4763, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fleishman-v-eli-lilly-co-ny-1984.