A patient that seeks emergency care in a hospital and subsequently suffers a loss of a limb or other critical harm may have grounds for pursuing medical malpractice claims against the hospital and its doctors. Defendants in medical malpractice cases rarely concede liability, however, regardless of the gravity of the harm suffered, and in many instances, they will seek dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims via summary judgment. In a recent New York ruling, the court discussed the burdens of proof imposed on each party in a medical malpractice case and what the plaintiff must show to withstand a defendant’s motion for summary judgment. If you were hurt by negligent care rendered in a hospital, it is in your best interest to meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer regarding your possible claims.
The Plaintiff’s Harm
It is alleged that the plaintiff visited the emergency department of the defendant hospital with complaints of numbness and pain in her left foot. She was evaluated by the defendant emergency physician and the defendant vascular surgeon, both of whom found no evidence of acute limb-threatening or vascular issues. The defendant surgeon discharged the plaintiff and directed her to follow up with him the next day, but when she tried to make an appointment, her request was refused.
It is reported that the plaintiff eventually underwent an evaluation with a different vascular surgeon, who determined she had no pulse in her left foot. Her left leg was ultimately amputated below the knee. She subsequently brought medical malpractice claims against the defendants. After discovery, the defendants moved for dismissal via summary judgment. The trial court denied their motion, and they appealed.
Shifting Burdens of Proof in New York Medical Malpractice Cases
In New York, a defendant seeking summary judgment in a medical malpractice action bears the burden of showing, at first glance, that there was either no departure from the standard of care or that any deviation from the standard did not cause the plaintiff’s harm. If the defendant meets this burden, the plaintiff then has to show that a factual dispute exists as to any of the elements for which the defendant has met its initial burden in order for their claims to survive.
If the parties in a medical malpractice case produce conflicting expert reports, summary judgment is not appropriate. In the subject case, the appellate court found that while the defendants produced expert reports sufficient to meet their burden of proof, the plaintiff countered with expert affidavits that demonstrated that triable issues of fact existed. As such, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s ruling.
Meet With a Knowledgeable Syracuse Medical Malpractice Lawyer
People who suffer critical harm due to the careless oversights of healthcare providers may be able to recover damages via medical malpractice lawsuits. If you were hurt by the incompetence of a doctor, you have the right to seek damages, and you should meet with a medical malpractice lawyer as soon as possible. The knowledgeable attorneys of DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers possess the skills and resources needed to hold negligent doctors accountable for the losses they cause, and if you hire us, we will work tirelessly on your behalf. You can contact us via our online form or by calling us at 833-200-2000 to set up a meeting.