Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog

New York Court Examines Summary Judgment in Truck Accident Cases

Published on: April 13, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

When large commercial vehicles shed parts while in motion, nearby motorists can suffer serious injuries. These incidents often raise questions about vehicle maintenance, driver oversight, and liability. However, when the underlying facts are disputed, courts are often reluctant to decide the case before full discovery and trial. A recent New York decision highlights the difficulty of resolving negligence claims on a motion for summary judgment where critical factual disputes remain unresolved. If you were injured in a collision with a commercial vehicle, a Syracuse personal injury attorney can assess whether you may be entitled to compensation.

Case Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff was driving along North Conduit Avenue in New York when she allegedly felt a loud impact on the driver’s side of her vehicle. The plaintiff claimed that a piece of tire tread from a nearby commercial truck detached while the truck was moving and struck her car, causing her to suffer serious injuries. The truck was reportedly owned by the defendant company and operated by a driver who was later identified.

New York Court Discusses Medical Malpractice Claims Against the Government

Published on: April 7, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Mental health treatment involves delicate clinical decisions, especially when a patient is at risk of self-harm. When a patient dies by suicide shortly after receiving psychiatric care, surviving family members may pursue legal action if they believe the care provided was inadequate. These cases are emotionally complex and legally challenging, particularly when government-employed professionals provide the care in question. A recent ruling from a New York court highlights how difficult it can be to succeed in a malpractice claim arising from a suicide, even where warning signs appear to have been present. If you lost a loved one due to what you suspect was negligent mental health care, a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney can help you explore your legal rights.

Background of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent had a long, intermittent history of mental health issues, including anxiety, depression, panic attacks, and suicidal thoughts. She had received treatment at the FQHC off and on over several years, with documented episodes of missed appointments, medication noncompliance, and inconsistent follow-up. In the final months before her death, she had been treated by both a social worker and a psychiatric nurse practitioner. The providers documented recurring symptoms of anxiety and depression, including reports of suicidal ideation, but they concluded that she did not exhibit signs warranting hospitalization.

It is reported that the decedent’s providers used a standardized assessment tool to evaluate her suicide risk and implemented safety plans in accordance with best practices. At her final visit on the day of her death, the decedent reportedly denied having suicidal intent or a plan, and the social worker determined that her condition was stable. Despite this, the decedent died by suicide within hours of leaving the facility. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Examines Liability for Dangerous Roadways

Published on: March 29, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

When serious car accidents occur on public roadways, injured parties often look to government entities for compensation, alleging failures in roadway maintenance or design. However, these cases frequently hinge on whether the state met its legal duty to maintain roads in a reasonably safe condition. A recent New York ruling addressed these issues in a personal injury lawsuit filed against the State of New York following a single-vehicle crash on a winding mountain road. If you sustained injuries due to unsafe road conditions, a Syracuse personal injury attorney can help you evaluate your legal options.

Background of the Case

It is reported that the claimant was driving on State Routes 44/55 in Ulster County in the early morning hours after visiting a scenic overlook. As the claimant descended the mountain, he allegedly failed to navigate a sharp hairpin turn, causing his vehicle to crash into a rock wall. The claimant sustained injuries and subsequently filed a lawsuit against the State of New York, asserting that the state negligently failed to maintain the roadway in a reasonably safe condition.

It is alleged that the claimant argued that the state failed to install sufficient safety measures, such as guiderails and chevron warning signs, at the location of the hairpin turn. The claimant also asserted that inadequate signage and roadway markings contributed to his inability to safely navigate the curve.

It is reported that following a nonjury trial, the Court of Claims found that the state had met its duty to reasonably maintain the roadway and was not liable for the claimant’s injuries. The claimant appealed the decision, challenging the court’s findings and asserting that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. Continue Reading ›

New York Case Highlights Impact of “Lavern’s Law” on Cancer Malpractic Claims

Published on: March 25, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Missed or delayed cancer diagnoses can have tragic consequences, and New York courts closely scrutinize such cases, especially when statutory limitations are in dispute. A recent New York case sheds light on how New York’s “Lavern’s Law,” which extends the statute of limitations for undiagnosed cancer claims, plays a pivotal role in determining the timeliness of medical malpractice lawsuits. If you or a loved one has suffered harm due to a delayed diagnosis, consulting a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney may help you explore your legal options.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent was treated by the defendant physician, an otolaryngologist, in July 2015 at a facility operated by a co-defendant healthcare entity. Reportedly, the decedent presented to the defendant physician with complaints of chronic hoarseness, leading the physician to conduct a physical examination and video scope. The defendant physician did not detect any masses or lesions suggestive of laryngeal cancer and did not recommend additional imaging or diagnostic procedures.

New York Court Examines Expert Testimony and Liability in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: February 27, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Failure to diagnose a medical condition in a timely manner can lead to catastrophic harm. Such oversights are particularly alarming when the condition is detectable through proper medical assessment and often give rise to claims against negligent providers. In medical malpractice cases, courts often examine whether healthcare providers overlooked critical signs or failed to follow appropriate diagnostic protocols. While healthcare providers accused of such negligence will often attempt to avoid liability, they cannot do so without compelling expert testimony, as demonstrated in a recent New York opinion. If you or a loved one suffered harm due to a missed diagnosis, it is in your best interest to consult with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney who can help you understand your legal options.

Factual and Procedural History

It is alleged that the patient, a minor, sought treatment from the defendant physician in January 2017 for persistent leg pain. Reportedly, diagnostic imaging was performed, but the physician failed to diagnose an aneurysmal bone cyst or other bone lesion in the patient’s left fibula. The untreated lesion allegedly worsened over several months, leading to the need for extensive surgery in September 2017 to remove the lesion. The plaintiff, acting individually and as the patient’s mother, asserted that the physician’s failure to diagnose the condition in a timely manner resulted in permanent injuries.

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the physician and affiliated healthcare providers, alleging that the delayed diagnosis and lack of appropriate follow-up care caused significant harm. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that they adhered to the accepted standard of care and that any alleged deviation did not proximately cause the patient’s injuries. The trial court granted the motion, dismissing the plaintiff’s claims and prompting an appeal. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Demonstrating Fault in Slip and Fall Cases

Published on: February 24, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Slip-and-fall accidents are among the most common types of personal injury claims, often hinging on whether a property owner failed to maintain safe premises. In lawsuits arising out of slip and fall accidents, the courts closely analyze whether the defendant had notice of a hazardous condition and whether reasonable steps were taken to prevent injuries to determine whether the plaintiff can proceed with their claim. A recent New York case illustrates the burden of proof plaintiffs face when alleging negligence in a premises liability case. If you were injured in a slip-and-fall accident, consulting a Syracuse personal injury attorney can help you understand your legal options.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff entered the defendant’s grocery store to purchase seafood when she slipped and fell near the fish counter. Reportedly, the store maintained a seafood display that utilized ice, which was designed to melt into a floor drain. The plaintiff claimed that water had accumulated on the floor near the display, creating a hazardous condition. After her fall, she noticed her clothes were wet and observed a puddle in the area where she fell.

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a negligence lawsuit against the defendant, asserting that the store failed to maintain safe premises and neglected to take adequate precautions to prevent hazardous conditions. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that there was no evidence it had actual or constructive notice of the alleged hazard and that its routine maintenance procedures ensured the safety of customers. The trial court granted the defendant’s motion, dismissing the plaintiff’s claims, leading to an appeal.

New York Court Discusses Federal Preemption in Personal Injury Cases

Published on: January 28, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

When workplace safety measures intersect with federal regulatory frameworks, determining liability can become challenging for courts. A recent New York case demonstrated how courts evaluate claims involving an intersection of New York’s Labor Law and federal regulations in the context of a construction site injury. If you or a loved one were hurt in a workplace accident, you may be owed damages, and it is smart to talk to a Syracuse personal injury attorney.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff, a helicopter lineman employed by a subcontractor, was injured on June 18, 2021, during a construction project overseen by the defendant. The defendant was under contract to perform repair and construction work on power lines and had subcontracted certain tasks to another company. The plaintiff’s role required him to work from a platform attached to a helicopter to access and repair sections of power lines. While performing his duties, the helicopter’s rotor reportedly came into contact with the structure, causing it to spin out of control and crash, leading to serious injuries.

Reportedly, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit alleging violations of New York Labor Law §§ 200, 240, and 241(6), as well as negligence on the part of the defendant as the general contractor. In response, the defendant moved to dismiss the complaint, asserting that the claims were preempted by the Federal Aviation Act (FAA) and its implementing regulations. The trial court denied the motion, determining that the FAA did not preempt the plaintiff’s claims because the helicopter functioned as construction equipment rather than an aircraft engaged in aviation activities. The defendant appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Explains Preservation of Evidence in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: January 24, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In cases involving allegations of medical malpractice and wrongful death, courts are often tasked with balancing the need for evidence preservation against procedural and legal requirements. This was illustrated in a recent New York case in which the court addressed issues such as pre-action discovery, evidence preservation, and requests for anonymity in sensitive litigation. If you lost a loved one due to the carelessness of a healthcare provider, it is wise to talk to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney regarding your options.

Factual and Procedural History

It is alleged that on November 8, 2024, the decedent experienced a mental health crisis and was transported by emergency medical services to the defendant hospital. The decedent was admitted and tragically passed away within 24 hours on November 9, 2024. The plaintiff, acting as the administrator of the decedent’s estate, claims that the healthcare providers at the defendant hospital and other entities deviated from accepted medical standards, leading to the decedent’s death.

Reportedly, the plaintiff filed a motion seeking to preserve materials critical to the claims, including 911 recordings, surveillance footage, and hospital records. The motion also requested permission to proceed under a pseudonym and seal the proceedings, citing the sensitive nature of the case and the potential harm to the decedent’s surviving children should these matters become public. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Evidence in Product Liability Cases

Published on: December 27, 2024 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

People harmed by defective products have the right to seek compensation for their losses. Proving liability often requires expert testimony, but only certain parties are qualified to testify as experts, as explained in a recent ruling issued in a New York product liability case. If you or a loved one has been injured by a defective product, it is essential to consult a skilled Syracuse personal injury attorney to evaluate your potential claims.

Background of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff was injured while operating an ironworker machine (the “Ironworker”) at his place of employment. The Ironworker, a piece of industrial equipment used for metal cutting and fabrication, was manufactured by the defendant. The plaintiff claimed that a rear guard was missing from the machine, which caused a piece of stainless steel to strike him above the eye, resulting in severe and permanent injuries, including loss of vision.

Reportedly, the plaintiff filed suit in September 2020, asserting claims of design defect, manufacturing defect, failure to warn, and breach of warranty. Specifically, the plaintiff argued that the Ironworker was defectively designed because it did not include a rear guard, which would have prevented the incident. The plaintiff further alleged that the defendant failed to provide adequate warnings regarding the risks associated with operating the machine without a rear guard. Additionally, the plaintiff sought to exclude evidence related to prior workplace injuries and certain Occupational Safety and Health Administration records.

Court Highlights the Importance of Expert Testimony in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: December 23, 2024 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Medical malpractice cases often require plaintiffs to prove not only that a deviation from the standard of care occurred but also that the deviation caused injury or death. These claims hinge on expert opinions and the ability to rebut evidence presented by the defense. A recent New York case demonstrates the critical role of expert testimony in medical malpractice litigation. If you or a loved one were harmed by potential medical negligence, consulting an experienced Syracuse medical malpractice attorney is essential.

Factual and Procedural History

It is alleged that in November 2013, the decedent was diagnosed with a 5.1 cm abdominal aortic aneurysm and subsequently underwent an endovascular aneurysm repair procedure. The surgery included the placement of a stent graft to manage the aneurysm. Over the following years, the decedent’s condition progressed, and additional intervention became necessary due to a Type IA endoleak—a known complication where blood flow persists into the aneurysm sac.

Reportedly, the decedent was referred to the defendant doctor, who advised her of the risks and need for open surgical repair of the endoleak. The procedure occurred in March 2016 and was performed by the defendant and a surgical team. During the surgery, the decedent suffered a splenic laceration, which required an emergent splenectomy, and a pancreatic injury that was subsequently repaired by another surgeon. Postoperatively, the decedent developed complications, including pancreatitis and infection, which ultimately led to her death on June 10, 2016, following weeks of intensive care. Continue Reading ›