Case ID: nj_57/html/0234-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

SHIRLEY YERZY AND RICHARD YERZY, HER HUSBAND, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. DAVID LEVINE, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
    Argued October 27 and November 9, 1970 —
    Decided December 7, 1970.
    
      
      Mr. John J. Francis, Jr., argued the cause for appellant (Mr. Richard F. Brennan, on the brief; (Messrs. Shanley and Fisher, attorneys).
    
      Mr. Lawrence D. Smith argued the cause for respondents (Messrs. Hein, Smith, Mooney and Berezin, attorneys).
   Per Curiam.

The Appellate Division reversed a judgment for defendant, 108 N. J. Super. 222 (1970), and we granted defendant’s petition for certification, 55 N. J. 587 (1970).

The judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed for the reasons given by it, with the modification that under the facts of this case (1) the question with respect to the statute of limitations is whether plaintiff brought this action within two years after plaintiff knew or had reason to know that plaintiff might have a basis for a claim against the defendant, and (2) in the light of defendant’s conversations with plaintiff before the further surgery by Dr. Glenn, the jury, in considering that question, may take into account the alleged omission of Dr. Glenn to tell plaintiff that the common hepatic duct had been severed and the omission of defendant to tell plaintiff that Dr. Glenn had so informed him.

For affirmance — Chief Justice Weinteaub and Justices Jacobs, Peoctoe, Hall, Schettino and Haneman — -6.

For reversal — none.