From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Weigold v. Patel

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Mar 30, 2004
268 Conn. 918 (Conn. 2004)

Summary

holding defendant psychologist and psychiatrist "had no duty to warn the patient not to operate her motor vehicle for the benefit of the decedent" "after ingesting prescribed medication"

Summary of this case from Jarmie v. Troncale

Opinion

Decided March 30, 2004


The plaintiff's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 81 Conn. App. 347 (AC 23289), is denied.

Michael J. Walsh and Ann W. Henderson, in support of the petition.

Lorinda S. Coon and John B. Farley, in opposition.


Summaries of

Weigold v. Patel

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Mar 30, 2004
268 Conn. 918 (Conn. 2004)

holding defendant psychologist and psychiatrist "had no duty to warn the patient not to operate her motor vehicle for the benefit of the decedent" "after ingesting prescribed medication"

Summary of this case from Jarmie v. Troncale
Case details for

Weigold v. Patel

Case Details

Full title:KERRY D. WEIGOLD, ADMINISTRATOR (ESTATE OF FRANCES WEIGOLD) v. JAYANTKUMAR…

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut

Date published: Mar 30, 2004

Citations

268 Conn. 918 (Conn. 2004)
847 A.2d 314

Citing Cases

Unifund CCR Partners v. Schaeppi

Accordingly, we conclude that it was not improper for the court to grant the defendants' motion for summary…

Trahan v. Cochran

"Even where harm was foreseeable, [our Supreme Court] has found no duty when the nexus between a defendant’s…