Medical Malpractice

Summary Judgment Granted in Part, Denied in Part in New York Family’s Medical Malpractice Lawsuit for Relative’s Post-Surgery Death

Published on: October 29, 2019 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In a Syracuse medical malpractice case, the plaintiff has the burden of proving his or case by a preponderance of the evidence. Often, a defendant (doctor, hospital, or other medical provider) will attempt to circumvent the usual trial practice by filing what is known as a summary judgment motion. Such a motion is granted when the court finds that there is no triable issue of fact.

When a court grants such a motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff’s case may be dismissed in part or even in its entirety. Thus, it is important that the plaintiff be able to offer sufficient proof of his or her claim in opposition to the motion. Consulting an experienced medical malpractice attorney early on in the process is essential to securing the necessary evidence of negligence to survive a motion for summary judgment and, ultimately, the prevail at trial.

Facts of the Case

In a recent case, the plaintiffs filed suit against the defendants, a medical center, a doctor, and others, asserting claims for medical malpractice, lack of informed consent, and the wrongful death of their decedent, a man who allegedly died from complications of gallbladder removal surgery. One of the doctors filed a motion for summary judgment. The Supreme Court for Kings County denied the motion, and the defendant doctor appealed.

New York Appellate Court Directs Entry of Order So-Ordering Stipulation of Dismissal But Allows Medical Malpractice Defendants’ Cross Claims

Published on: October 26, 2019 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

A Syracuse medical malpractice case may involve allegations against multiple defendants – a hospital, one or more doctors, and possibly other healthcare providers, as well. Generally speaking, the more defendants there are in a case, the more expensive and time-consuming the litigation is likely to be. For this reason, a plaintiff may opt to dismiss his or her claims against one or more defendants and proceed against those remaining.

In some cases, the defendants themselves may oppose such a measure and may file a cross claim aimed at keeping a co-defendant actively engaged in the lawsuit so as to have the option of shifting – or at least sharing – liability and blame if the case proceeds to trial.

Facts of the Case

A recent appellate case originating in the Supreme Court of Westchester County, the plaintiffs sought to assert a medical malpractice claim against a doctor and medical center following the death of their decedent from a stroke. According to the plaintiff’s complaint, the doctor (who was an emergency room attending physician at the medical center) negligently failed to recognize the symptoms of a stroke, thereby contributing to the decedent’s death. Four years after filing their suit, the plaintiffs signed a stipulation to discontinue their cause of action against the defendant doctor. However, the medical center did not agree to the stipulation and sought to amend its answer to add a cross claim against the doctor for indemnification and contribution. The doctor, in turn, amended his answer to assert similar cross claims against the medical center.

Hospital Employee’s Takedown of Mental Health Patient Was Intentional, Not Negligent; Thus Claim Was Time-Barred

Published on: October 23, 2019 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In any Syracuse medical malpractice case, time is of the essence. When a claim is not filed within the time allowed by law, it is very difficult – and often impossible – to proceed with what might otherwise have been a good case. This is unfortunate, as the plaintiff’s suffering goes uncompensated and the defendant gets away with poor treatment of a patient.

The exact time during which a claim can be made can vary significantly from case to case, with some situations calling for action to be taken within a very short time (especially if a governmental entity may be liable or if a defective product caused harm to a user).

Facts of the Case

The plaintiff in a recent case was the guardian ad litem for a paranoid schizophrenic adult male patient who claimed that an employee of the defendant hospital had “beat [him] up” when he was an in-patient there in 2009, causing him to lose consciousness and sustain injuries to his eye that required surgery and resulted in loss of vision. Somewhat in contrast to the patient’s testimony, the plaintiff’s complaint asserted that the patient had been “physically taken down, restrained, and controlled… in a negligent manner,” thereby causing his injuries; according to the plaintiff, the defendant was liable for the actions of its employees under a theory of respondeat superior.

New York Appellate Division Says Trial Court Was Wrong to Grant Summary Judgment on Liability as a Discovery Sanction in Medical Malpractice Case

Published on: September 23, 2019 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

A Syracuse medical malpractice lawsuit can take a long time to resolve. For starters, an investigation must be conducted, an expert must be retained, and suit must be filed – and that’s just to get the case started.

As matters progress, the parties usually exchange discovery requests in order to learn more about the evidence that will likely be presented at trial. This process takes at least a few months, and often much longer. In some cases, there can be additional complications that create unexpected delays, such as the filing of a bankruptcy petition by a party or its insurance company.

Facts of the Case

In a recent appellate case arising in the Supreme Court, Erie County, the plaintiff was a man who filed suit in 2011, seeking compensation for injuries that he allegedly suffered due to the negligence of the defendant health care center’s agents and employees. The parties exchanged discovery requests the following year, but then the action was dormant for several years as the plaintiff pursued relief from the defendant’s insurer in out-of-state bankruptcy proceedings. In late 2016, the plaintiff revived the action by resubmitting the discovery demands that he had originally made in 2012.

New York Appellate Division Affirms Summary Judgment to Hospital Following Patient’s Death From Pre-Existing Bacterial Infection

Published on: September 13, 2019 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Losing a loved one is one of the most painful experiences in life. When the loved one’s death was preventable, the situation is even more difficult. If you have recently lost a family member and have reason to believe that a doctor, nurse, or hospital’s negligence was to blame, you should talk to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer about the possibility of filing a claim in court.

Medical negligence cases are usually met with great resistance from the medical professional(s) who is accused of neglect, so it is important to consult with an attorney as soon as possible so that the case can be properly investigated, and evidence can be gathered to support the plaintiff’s case.

Facts of the Case

In a recent case, the plaintiff was a woman seeking compensation for the death of a man (presumably a family member) whom she alleged died due to the medical negligence of the defendants, a hospital, a doctor, and others. According to the plaintiff, the decedent presented to the defendant hospital for emergency care, went into cardiac arrest, and died three days later. Unbeknownst to the decedent, he was apparently suffering from a bacterial staph infection known as Methicillin Sensitive Staphylococcus Aureus (MSSA) and had been for several days. (A laboratory facility had failed to inform the defendant of his infection.) In response to the plaintiff’s allegations that the decedent’s death was caused by their failure to properly treat and diagnose him during the emergency visit, the defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. The Supreme Court, Bronx County, granted the defendants’ motion, and the plaintiff appealed.

New York Appellate Court Holds that Plaintiff’s Choice of Venue in Medical Malpractice Case Was Proper

Published on: September 10, 2019 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Most people understand that the first step in pursuing monetary compensation in a Syracuse medical malpractice case is to file a claim in court. However, what is less commonly known is that there can sometimes be an argument about the proper court in which to file the claim.

When a defendant disagrees with a plaintiff’s choice of venue, he or she may opt to file a motion to change venue. However, a change of venue is not automatic, and the burden of proving that the plaintiff’s venue choice was improper rests with the moving party.

There are several factors to consider in determining whether venue is proper in a particular court, including, among other things, the defendant’s residence address and/or principal place of business.

Administrator’s Medical Malpractice Lawsuit Was Timely, Says New York Appellate Court

Published on: August 30, 2019 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

When it comes to medical malpractice cases, there are some commonalities regardless of where the suit is filed – the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to prove that there was a deviation from the accepted standard of care, for example.

However, with regard to procedural matters, such as when a Syracuse medical malpractice claim must be filed and by whom, the law of the State of New York can differ from than that of sister states.

Thus, it is very important to talk to a Syracuse personal injury or wrongful death attorney about your case if you or a loved one has been hurt by a nurse, doctor, or hospital. Time is of the essence in such matters, so please do not delay in seeking advice about your case.

Late-Filing of New York Medical Malpractice Claim Permitted Under Relation-Back Doctrine

Published on: August 15, 2019 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Those who have been hurt by a doctor, nurse, or hospital have a limited time in which to file a medical malpractice claim. Usually, claims not filed within this time period are dismissed by the court as untimely.

However, there are a limited number of circumstances in which a late-filed claim may be allowed. One such exception is referred to as the “relation-back” doctrine. A recent appellate case explored the applicability of the doctrine to a case in which additional defendants were added to an ongoing lawsuit after the expiration of the usual limitations period. If you or a loved one has been injured and you wonder if it is too late to file a claim, it is important that you speak with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

Facts of the Case

In a recent appellate case originating in the Supreme Court of Kings County, the plaintiff filed a wrongful death claim against a medical center and others following the death of the decedent in May 2009. Prior to her death, the decedent had been treated for abdominal pain in the defendant medical center on multiple occasions over a period of about one month. The plaintiff’s suit, which was filed in 2011, named the medical center and several individual healthcare providers as defendants. In 2014, the defendant medical center filed a third-party action against another provider who had become affiliated with a different facility, along with three other third-party defendants.

New York Court Holds that Defendants’ Failure to File Timely Answer Should Have Resulted in Default Judgment in Medical Negligence Case

Published on: August 8, 2019 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Hopefully, everyone knows by now that there is a statute of limitations that places an outer limit on the time during which a Syracuse medical malpractice claim can be filed. While there are a few, very limited exceptions to this rule, most cases that are filed outside of this time period are dismissed by the court – no matter how egregious the conduct or how severe the injuries.

It is also important to note that there are many other deadlines that may apply in a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit, including the time for filing an answer if you happen to be the person or business against whom a claim is made. Again, while there are a few exceptions to the general rule regarding timeliness (of filing both a complaint and an answer thereto), but these are few and far between.

Facts of the Case

In a recent case, the plaintiff was the administrator of the estate of a man who allegedly suffered personal injuries while a resident at nursing home allegedly operated by the defendants. The plaintiff filed suit against the defendants, seeking to recover money damages. The defendants failed to answer the plaintiff’s complaint within the time allowed by law, so the plaintiff filed a motion for a default judgment pursuant to New York Consolidated Laws, Civil Practice Law and Rules § 3215. The defendants opposed the motion filed by the plaintiff and filed their own motion, cross-moving for an extension of time to file their answer.
Continue Reading ›

New York Court Reverses Lower Tribunal’s Order Disqualifying Attorney for Estate of Deceased Alleged Medical Malpractice Victim

Published on: July 27, 2019 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Syracuse medical malpractice lawsuits can have multiple complications, especially when the alleged act of medical negligence resulted in a loved one’s death. Part of the reason for this is that the actual plaintiff in such a case is the deceased person’s estate – not his or her survivors. Although family members may ultimately receive the proceeds of the litigation, if it is successful, the action is maintained in the name of the estate, not the individuals. This added layer of complexity means that extra time may be needed in order for all of the appropriate steps to be taken as the case is prepared to be filed, so please act quickly if you have lost a loved one due to a doctor or hospital’s neglect.

Facts of the Case

In a recently decided wrongful death case, the plaintiff was the administrator of the estate of a woman who allegedly died due to medical malpractice by the defendants, a nursing and rehabilitation center and another medical provider. The plaintiff filed suit in the Supreme Court of Nassau County, asserting a wrongful death claim. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(3) and (7) on the basis that the plaintiff lacked the capacity to maintain the action due to alleged disqualification; the plaintiff was not only the administrator of the decedent’s estate, he was also the decedent’s son, one of two distributees of the decedent’s estate, an attorney, and one of three witnesses to the alleged medical negligence at issue.

The trial court agreed with the defendants that the advocate-witness rule barred the plaintiff from acting as counsel for the decedent’s estate and granted their motion to the extent of disqualifying the plaintiff as counsel for the decedent’s estate. The plaintiff appealed.
Continue Reading ›