The doctrine of fraudulent concealment does not apply to nullify the impact of the MCARE Act’s statute of repose, the state Superior Court has ruled.
In so holding, a unanimous three-judge panel also reasoned that a Pennsylvania man seeking to sue over allegedly negligent laser eye surgery did not have a viable cause of action until after the the Medical Care Availability and Reduction of Error Act became effective in 2002. Moreover, the court observed, the plaintiff, Francis X. Osborne, did not discover the surgery’s alleged negative effects until after that date.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
