1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 254 N.J.
  5. 254 N.J. Super. 359 (1992)
 

KAROL v. BERKOW

254 N.J. Super. 359 (1992)

603 A.2d 547

RONALD KAROL AND ARLENE KAROL, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. BORI BERKOW, M.D., DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided March 6, 1992.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Bryan D. Garruto argued the cause for appellants (Garruto, Galex & Cantor, attorneys).

John R. Orlovsky argued the cause for respondent (Orlovsky, Moody & Gabrysiak, attorneys; John R. Orlovsky and Paul F. Schaaff, Jr., on the brief).

Before Judges GAULKIN, MUIR, Jr. and LANDAU.

The opinion of the court was delivered by GAULKIN, P.J.A.D.

This medical malpractice case was brought by Ronald Karol and his wife against Bori Berkow, M.D., for his alleged failure to timely diagnose and treat a melanoma. The Law Division dismissed the complaint as filed more than two years after the cause of action accrued. N.J.S.A. 2A:14-2. The case requires us to determine when an increased-risk-of-harm cause of action accrues.

I

Karol...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases