Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog

New York Court Discusses Expert Testimony in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: October 29, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

When patients undergo surgery, they trust their doctors to follow accepted medical standards and provide proper care during recovery. Unfortunately, not every patient’s experience meets that expectation. When complications arise after surgery, determining whether they stem from medical negligence or natural healing challenges can be complex. A recent New York decision highlights how courts evaluate these claims and what evidence is necessary to proceed to trial. If you or someone you love suffered complications after surgery, consulting an experienced Syracuse medical malpractice attorney can help you understand your rights and whether the facts of your case support a claim.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the plaintiff initiated a medical malpractice action against the defendants, a group of orthopedic physicians and their affiliated medical practice, alleging negligent treatment following a knee injury. The plaintiff underwent surgical repair for a torn meniscus, followed by post-operative care administered by the defendant physicians. After the procedure, the plaintiff continued to experience swelling, pain, and instability in the operated knee, ultimately claiming that the defendants’ improper surgical technique and inadequate follow-up caused additional damage requiring further medical intervention.

Allegedly, the plaintiff contended that the defendants failed to properly assess imaging studies, misdiagnosed the extent of the injury, and failed to advise on or implement appropriate physical therapy protocols. The complaint further asserted that the defendants’ conduct deviated from accepted medical standards and proximately caused prolonged pain and functional impairment. The defendants denied the allegations and moved for summary judgment, submitting expert affirmations asserting that all care provided complied with accepted orthopedic practices and that the plaintiff’s residual symptoms resulted from pre-existing degenerative changes, not medical negligence. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Liability for Falls on Sidewalks

Published on: October 25, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

When pedestrians walk along city streets, they expect reasonably safe pathways. Yet, many urban areas include sections without constructed sidewalks, forcing individuals to walk on driveways, grass strips, or unpaved paths. Questions often arise regarding who bears responsibility when an injury occurs in such spaces. A recent New York opinion clarifies the limits of municipal liability under New York’s Administrative Code, illustrating that the mere absence of a sidewalk does not create a duty on the part of the City to prevent accidents. If you suffered injuries in a fall on someone else’s property, it is in your best interest to talk to an attorney about your possible claims.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff commenced a personal injury action against the defendant, the City of New York, alleging she sustained injuries while walking on a grassy path adjacent to a cement driveway. The plaintiff claimed her right foot struck the raised edge of the driveway, causing her to trip and fall. In her deposition, she stated that the cement driveway was approximately two inches higher than the adjoining grass and that a hole existed near the raised edge. However, she did not assert that the hole caused or contributed to her fall. Rather, she maintained that her accident resulted from the abrupt elevation difference between the grassy area and the driveway’s edge.

New York Court Discusses Evidence Sufficient to Support a Premises Liability Claim

Published on: September 29, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

When tenants and visitors use staircases in apartment buildings, they expect those stairs to be reasonably safe. A single misstep can cause serious injury, and premises liability law gives injured individuals the right to pursue claims when dangerous conditions are left uncorrected. But not every uneven surface or crack will support a lawsuit. A recent decision from a New York court highlights the limits of liability, showing that minor, trivial defects are not actionable. If you have been hurt in a fall on another’s property, it is critical to consult with a Syracuse premises liability attorney who can evaluate whether the facts of your case are sufficient to establish negligence.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the plaintiff brought consolidated actions against the defendants, the owner and manager of her apartment building, after she allegedly sustained injuries while descending an interior staircase. In her bills of particulars, the plaintiff stated that her fall occurred on the “B staircase between the lobby and the 1st floor on the 7th step up from the bottom.”

Allegedly, during her deposition, the plaintiff admitted she was uncertain which stairwell she used at the time of the fall, suggesting it may have been the “A” staircase instead of “B.” However, she described the route she took before the fall and identified photographs that, she claimed, accurately depicted a cracked and uneven step that caused her to trip. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiff could not identify the cause of her fall without speculation and that, in any event, the alleged defect was too minor to be actionable. The trial court denied the motion, and the defendants appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Sufficiency of Expert Opinions in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: September 24, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

When families consent to medical treatment, they do so with the expectation that doctors will both follow accepted standards of care and provide clear information about the risks involved. A failure in either respect can have devastating consequences and often leads to medical malpractice lawsuits. Yet such cases are not won by suspicion alone; courts demand solid evidence and credible expert testimony to establish liability. A recent ruling from a New York court shows how quickly a case can collapse when a plaintiff’s expert opinion is deemed speculative or unsupported. If you or a loved one has suffered harm after treatment, you should consult a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney.

Case Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff, individually and as administrator of the decedent’s estate, brought an action alleging medical malpractice and lack of informed consent against multiple defendants, including a physician who provided testosterone therapy. The plaintiff claimed that this treatment contributed to the decedent’s decline and death.

Allegedly, the defendant physician moved for summary judgment to dismiss the claims against him, arguing that his care met accepted standards and that the decedent had been properly informed of the risks of testosterone therapy. He also sought, in the alternative, to preclude portions of the plaintiff’s expert’s testimony. The trial court denied the defendant’s motion in September 2023, permitting the claims to proceed. The defendant appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Explains COVID-19 Medical Malpractice Immunity

Published on: August 12, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

The COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for healthcare providers, including nursing homes and rehabilitation centers. Families who lost loved ones in these settings often sought accountability through medical malpractice or wrongful death claims. Yet New York law temporarily granted broad immunity to healthcare facilities under the Emergency or Disaster Treatment Protection Act (EDTPA), shielding them from many civil suits arising from pandemic-related care. While the pandemic has ended, this statutory immunity continues to influence litigation, as demonstrated by a recent New York ruling. If your loved one suffered harm in a healthcare facility, it is important to consult with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to understand the laws that may affect your rights.

Case Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff, acting as proposed administrator of his mother’s estate, commenced an action against a nursing home where the decedent resided before her passing. The plaintiff alleged that the decedent contracted COVID-19 while living at the facility and subsequently died in April 2020. The plaintiff asserted causes of action for negligence, gross negligence, and wrongful death, alleging that the facility failed to protect the decedent from exposure to the virus. The complaint sought damages on behalf of the estate, contending that the nursing home’s care fell below acceptable standards during the pandemic.

Allegedly, the defendant nursing home moved to dismiss the complaint under CPLR 3211(a), arguing that it was immune from liability pursuant to the EDTPA. The statute, enacted in April 2020, provided health care facilities with immunity from civil and criminal liability for harm arising from acts or omissions in the course of providing services during the COVID-19 emergency, so long as certain conditions were met. The defendant asserted that all care provided to the decedent was rendered in compliance with emergency rules, in response to the outbreak, and in good faith. The trial court denied the defendant’s motion, concluding that dismissal was not warranted at the pleading stage. The defendant appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Procedural Considerations in Slip and Fall Cases

Published on: August 6, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

While accidents frequently happen in businesses or social establishments, not every fall or injury creates a basis for legal recovery. In premises liability cases, New York courts require proof of a dangerous condition and evidence that the landowner either created or knew about the defect. A recent decision issued in a slip and fall case in New York illustrates how the courts review the sufficiency of evidence and compliance with discovery rules when evaluating whether a case should proceed to trial. If you have been injured in a fall or another incident on unsafe property, it is critical to consult with a Syracuse personal injury attorney about your rights and remedies.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff commenced an action in 2015, seeking damages for personal injuries she allegedly sustained after falling at approximately 11:45 p.m. while attempting to enter a bar through its rear doorway. The bar was owned by the defendant bar owners, while the premises themselves were owned by the defendant property owner, who leased the space to the bar.

It is further reported that the plaintiff alleged she lost her balance and fell while stepping on a “steep ramp” at the threshold of the doorway. She contended that the condition of the ramp created a hazardous entranceway, which caused her accident. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that the threshold did not constitute a dangerous or defective condition and that the plaintiff could not establish liability without resorting to speculation. They submitted photographs of the entranceway and an expert report stating that no unsafe condition existed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Examines Liability in Chain Reaction Collisions

Published on: July 29, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Rear-end collisions are among the most straightforward traffic cases in New York law, as it is often presumed that the rear driver is at fault. Nonetheless, such cases can still be complicated, as demonstrated in a recent New York opinion issued in a case involving a chain-reaction collision. If you were hurt in a multi-vehicle accident, you may be owed damages, and you should speak to a Syracuse car accident attorney as soon as possible.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff was involved in a chain-reaction collision during morning rush hour while driving in stop-and-go traffic on a wet and drizzly roadway. According to the plaintiff, her vehicle was fully stopped when it was struck from behind after the defendant, the rear-most driver in the chain, collided with a middle vehicle, which was then pushed into the plaintiff’s car. The plaintiff brought a personal injury lawsuit against the defendant, alleging that the defendant’s negligent operation of her vehicle caused the crash and her resulting injuries.

It is alleged that at trial, the plaintiff rested her case before the defendant had presented any evidence and then moved for a directed verdict on the issue of liability. The trial court denied the motion as premature. The jury ultimately ruled in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff then filed a post-trial motion under CPLR 4404 seeking judgment notwithstanding the verdict or, in the alternative, a new trial. The trial court denied the motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Examines When a Delayed Diagnosis Constitutes Malpractice

Published on: July 26, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In medical malpractice litigation, plaintiffs must not only allege negligence but also present competent evidence linking that negligence to a patient’s injury. This requirement is particularly important in delayed diagnosis cases, where causation hinges on whether earlier intervention would have changed the outcome. A recent decision from a New York court illustrates how courts evaluate these issues at the summary judgment stage. If you suspect a delay in diagnosis or treatment has harmed your health, you should meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney who can help you assess your legal options.

Case Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff sought treatment at a private OB/GYN practice in 2017 after noticing a lump in her left breast. The defendant physician, affiliated with the practice, examined the plaintiff and referred her for diagnostic imaging. A mammogram and sonogram were performed and reportedly interpreted as showing no evidence of malignancy. The plaintiff was advised to return in six months for follow-up testing.

It is alleged that the plaintiff returned in early 2018 and was again referred for imaging. This time, the results raised concerns for possible malignancy. A biopsy was ordered, and the plaintiff was ultimately diagnosed with Stage II breast cancer. She underwent chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation. The plaintiff filed suit against the OB/GYN physician and practice, alleging that their failure to properly assess and respond to her initial complaints resulted in a delayed diagnosis and worsened prognosis. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Addresses Conflicting Expert Reports in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: June 11, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Medical malpractice cases often turn on whether a provider responded appropriately to a patient’s symptoms during postoperative care. Under New York law, healthcare professionals must adhere to accepted medical standards when evaluating signs of complications, including potential infections. As such, conflicting expert opinions on the standards of care can prevent the early dismissal of a claim, as shown in a recent New York opinion issued in a medical malpractice case. If you have suffered harm due to inadequate medical treatment, you should speak with a skilled Syracuse medical malpractice attorney about your rights.

The Case Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent arthroscopic surgery on his right knee in March 2016 to correct an internal knee derangement. Following the surgery, the plaintiff received physical therapy at the defendant healthcare provider’s office and was treated by the individual defendant provider between March and August 2016. The plaintiff continued to experience pain and swelling in the affected leg over the course of several months.

It is alleged that by May 2017, the plaintiff’s symptoms had worsened, and he presented to a hospital with pain and swelling in the same leg. There, he was diagnosed with osteomyelitis, a serious bone infection. Treatment of the condition ultimately required a bone graft, among other interventions. The plaintiff then instituted a medical malpractice case against the providers responsible for his postoperative care, asserting that they negligently failed to evaluate and treat signs of infection, which caused or contributed to his injuries. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Addresses Obstructed Crosswalk Signal in Wrongful Death Case

Published on: June 6, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In pedestrian accident cases, courts often examine whether environmental conditions played a role in the incident. One significant factor is the visibility of traffic control signals. New York law imposes a nondelegable duty on municipalities to maintain roadways, including ensuring that traffic signals are not obscured by foliage or other obstructions, and if they fail to do so, they may be held accountable, as demonstrated in a recent New York ruling. If you lost a loved one in a pedestrian collision involving dangerous road conditions, it is important to speak with a qualified Syracuse wrongful death attorney about your options for recovery.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff, acting on behalf of the decedent’s estate, filed a wrongful death action against the defendants, including a municipal entity and a contractor responsible for maintaining trees at the site of a fatal collision. The incident occurred while the decedent was lawfully crossing a street within a marked crosswalk when she was struck and killed by a speeding vehicle.

It is alleged that at the time of the accident, foliage partially obscured the pedestrian signal at the crosswalk where the collision took place. The plaintiff claimed that the obstruction prevented the decedent and other pedestrians from clearly seeing whether it was safe to cross, and further asserted that the obstruction was a contributing factor in the fatal event. The defendants moved for summary judgment, seeking dismissal of the complaint. Continue Reading ›