Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog

New York Court Explains Leave to Amend Answers in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: March 14, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Generally, defendants in medical malpractice actions must set forth all of their affirmative defenses in their answer to the plaintiff’s complaint, and if they do not, they waive the right to assert them. Typically, though, a defendant that failed to include all their affirmative defenses in a response can seek leave from the court to file an amendment. In a recent ruling, a New York court discussed the factors evaluated when a defendant seeks leave to amend their answer to a complaint in a medical malpractice case. If you were hurt by the negligence of a physician, it is in your best interest to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney regarding your rights.

The Procedural History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff underwent a hysterectomy to remove a uterine tumor. The defendant performed the surgery. The plaintiff suffered damage to her ureter in the procedure, which she alleged was the result of the defendant’s negligence. Thus, she filed a medical malpractice case against him. The defendant filed its answer to the plaintiff’s complaint but sought leave from the court to amend its answer to include additional affirmative defenses after the plaintiff’s deposition. The court denied the motion, and the defendant appealed.

Leave to Amend Answers in Medical Malpractice Cases

On appeal, the appellate court found that the trial court improperly exercised its discretion in denying the defendant’s motion and, therefore, reversed the trial court ruling. Under New York law, even if a defendant was or should have been aware of the theories and facts they wish to assert in an amended answer for some time before seeking the amendment, delays, in and of themselves, are not sufficient grounds for denying a leave to amend. Continue Reading ›

Proving a Doctor Committed Medical Malpractice Under New York Law

Published on: March 13, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Many people who seek medical care in New York speak Spanish as their primary language. Thus, if they suffer injuries due to incompetent medical care and pursue claims against their providers, they may need to hire an interpreter to translate their testimony during discovery and trial. If the case results in a defense verdict, the unfavorable outcome does not necessarily mean that the interpreter did not perform their duties correctly, however. This was illustrated in a recent medical malpractice ruling in which the court affirmed judgment in favor of the defendant despite the plaintiff’s protestations that the translator negatively impacted their case. If you were harmed by a careless doctor, it is advisable to consult a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to discuss your rights.

The History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff suffered from uterine fibroids, for which she treated with the defendant. The defendant performed surgery on the plaintiff to remove the fibroid. The plaintiff experienced complications following the surgery, which prompted her to file a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant. The case proceeded to trial, during which a Spanish interpreter translated for the plaintiff. The jury ultimately ruled in favor of the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed.

Proving a Doctor Committed Medical Malpractice

On appeal, the plaintiff argued that she was deprived of a fair trial because one of the interpreters provided by the court incorrectly translated the questions she was asked as well as her testimony. The appellate court noted, however, that the plaintiff failed to ask for a different interpreter, move for a mistrial, or otherwise preserve the issue at trial. Continue Reading ›

Assessing Expert Evidence in New York Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: February 24, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In some cases, multiple health care providers will contribute to a patient’s harm. As such, the patient may pursue medical malpractice claims against numerous providers on more than one basis. Each claim will be evaluated individually, though, and while some claims may be adequate, others may be dismissed. This was illustrated by a New York court in a recent opinion delivered in an OB-GYN malpractice case in which the court granted summary judgment as to one defendant but not the other. If you sustained injuries because of incompetent care offered by an OB-GYN, it is prudent to confer with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney regarding your potential causes of action.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the defendant obstetrician delivered the plaintiff’s baby without issue and then proceeded to manually remove her placenta from her uterus. Two weeks later, the defendant gynecologist performed a dilation and curettage procedure in which she removed almost 80 grams of necrotic placental tissue. She also extracted inflamed smooth muscle that was consistent with myometrium and inflamed endometrial tissue that was consistent with chronic endometriosis. Allegedly, the plaintiff subsequently developed severe Asherman’s syndrome and was informed she was no longer able to carry a pregnancy to term. As such, she filed medical malpractice claims against the defendants, alleging their negligence caused her harm. The defendants moved for summary judgment, which the court granted. The plaintiff appealed.

Assessing Expert Evidence in Medical Malpractice Cases

Upon review, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s ruling with regard to the defendant gynecologist but reversed it with regard to the defendant obstetrician. The appellate court explained that while a medical malpractice claim cannot be solely supported by 20/20 hindsight, the post dilation and curettage pathology report allowed for the inference that a portion of the placenta was left in the plaintiff’s uterus following the initial manual removal. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Evidence Sufficient to Support a Motion for Summary Judgment in a Medical Malpractice Case

Published on: February 20, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In New York medical malpractice cases, it is not uncommon for a defendant to seek dismissal prior to trial. In most instances, they will do so by filing a motion asking the court to grant summary judgment in their favor. If they meet their evidentiary burden with regards to the claims asserted in the motion, the onus then shifts to the plaintiff, who must then produce evidence that shows factual disputes exist in order to defeat the motion. If the defendant fails to meet its burden, though, the motion will be denied regardless of the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s response, as illustrated recently in an opinion issued by a New York court in an emergency room malpractice case. If you suffered harm due to the recklessness of a health care provider, it is wise to talk to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney about your rights.

Historical Background of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent visited the emergency department of the defendant medical center, where she was evaluated by the defendant doctor. She presented with complaints of a severe headache, which the defendant diagnosed as a migraine. He discharged the decedent, who followed up with her primary care physician. After a subsequent visit to the emergency department, she died of a subarachnoid hemorrhage.

Reportedly, the decedent’s estate then filed medical malpractice claims against the defendant doctor and alleged that the defendant hospital was liable for his negligence. The defendant hospital asked the court to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims through summary judgment. The court denied the motion, and the defendant appealed. Continue Reading ›

Grounds for Granting a Motion for Reargument in a Medical Malpractice Case Discussed by New York Court

Published on: February 19, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Unfortunately, mistakes made during relatively low-risk medical procedures can cause devastating harm. Even in cases in which liability seems clear, however, defendants in medical malpractice cases will often deny that they caused the plaintiff to suffer harm and will seek dismissal via a motion for summary judgment. While the courts typically rule reasonably with regard to such motions, they are not invulnerable to mistakes. While parties cannot relitigate issues, they may be able to reargue them when it is clear the court committed an error, as demonstrated in a recent anesthesia malpractice case. If you were hurt by negligently administered anesthesia, it is advisable to consult a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney about your possible claims.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

Allegedly, the plaintiff underwent surgery to repair a fractured ankle. During the procedure, his oxygen level dropped rapidly. The defendant anesthesiologist then administered an excessive dose of anesthesia which caused the plaintiff to go into an extended respiratory depression, causing him to suffer brain damage. The plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant, arguing that his negligence harmed the plaintiff. The defendant moved for dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims by summary judgment.

It is reported that the trial court granted the motion as to the plaintiff’s claims that arose out of the improper administration of anesthesia on the grounds that the plaintiff failed to raise the issue. The plaintiff moved to reargue the issue and clarify what matters would proceed to trial. The court granted the plaintiff’s motion to reargue the issue, noting that it had inadvertently failed to recognize the fact that the plaintiff amended the bill of particulars to include claims regarding the negligent administration of anesthesia. As such, the court denied the defendant’s motion as it related to the claims arising out of the negligent administration of anesthesia. The defendant then appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Sets Forth Grounds for Overturning a Verdict in a Medical Malpractice Case

Published on: February 16, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Most plaintiffs pursuing medical malpractice claims will rely on a jury rather than a judge to decide issues of liability and damages. As juries are comprised of human beings, though, they are not immune to mistakes, and in some cases, they fail to rule in accordance with the evidence. Luckily, the law allows parties who feel that a jury ruled improperly to seek a new trial or a judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Obtaining such relief is not easy, however, as demonstrated in a recent opinion set forth by a New York court in a medical malpractice case. If you suffered harm due to incompetent care rendered by a physician, you have the right to pursue claims for your losses, and it is smart to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

Background of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent was hospitalized due to a pulmonary embolism. He was subsequently diagnosed with cancer and later died. The plaintiff, the executor of his estate, filed a wrongful death and medical malpractice lawsuit naming the hospital and numerous doctors as defendants. The matter progressed to trial, and after the plaintiff presented her evidence, she settled with one of the defendants. The trial concluded, after which the jury found that while the first individually named defendant departed from the standard of care, the second had not. The plaintiff moved to set aside the verdict as to the second individually named defendant. The trial court denied her request, and she appealed.

Grounds for Overturning a Verdict in a Medical Malpractice Case

On appeal, the court expounded that a court may not set aside a jury’s verdict in favor of a defendant unless it finds that the evidence weighs so heavily in favor of the plaintiff that the jury could not have reached the verdict had it fairly interpreted the evidence. If a verdict aligns with a reasonable view of the evidence, though, the defendant is entitled to the presumption that the jury adopted a reasonable view. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Explains the Elements of a Lack of Informed Consent Claim

Published on: February 13, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Many medical treatments carry some degree of risk. As such, doctors must fully advise patients of the potential side effects and adverse consequences of a treatment so that the patient can make an educated decision regarding whether to proceed. If a doctor fails to do so, they may be liable for the patient’s lack of informed consent. Recently, a New York court discussed the elements of a lack of informed consent claim in a matter in which the plaintiff asserted he suffered harm following orthopedic injections. If you were hurt due to the negligence of a radiologist, you might be able to recover compensation, and it is advisable to confer with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to determine what evidence you have to submit to establish fault.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the plaintiff treated with the defendant podiatrist and defendant radiologist for pain caused by bone spurs. Per the defendant podiatrist’s referral, the defendant radiologist administered guided steroid injections into the back of the plaintiff’s feet. As a result of the injections, the plaintiff suffered torn Achilles tendons in both feet. He subsequently filed a lawsuit against the defendants asserting claims of medical malpractice and lack of informed consent. The defendant later filed motions for summary judgment. The trial court denied their motions, and they appealed.

Elements of a Lack of Informed Consent Claim

The appellate court affirmed the trial court ruling. In New York, a plaintiff alleging medical malpractice due to a lack of informed consent has to prove that the defendant failed to inform the plaintiff of the reasonably foreseeable risks of the treatment and any alternative treatments and that a reasonable practitioner would have. The plaintiff must also prove that a person of reasonable prudence that is in the same position as the plaintiff would not have undergone the treatment had they been so informed and that the lack of informed consent proximately caused the plaintiff to suffer actual harm. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Grounds for Dismissing a Medical Malpractice Case Due to Delay

Published on: February 10, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

The New York legislature is wary of people filing medical malpractice lawsuits and then delaying the resolution of their claims. As such, it drafted a statute that allows defendants to compel a plaintiff to move a case forward within 90 days, otherwise, it may be dismissed. Defendants cannot use the law to benefit from delays they caused, however, as discussed in a recent ruling delivered in an OB-GYN malpractice matter. If you suffered harm due to the negligence of your OB-GYN, it is in your best interest to contact a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to assess what claims you may be able to pursue.

The Procedural Background of the Case

It is alleged that in 2012, the plaintiff underwent a fertility procedure that was performed by the defendant. In April 2015, she commenced a medal malpractice lawsuit against the defendant. In September of that year, issue was joined, and the defendant served the plaintiff with a demand for a bill of particulars, a notice of deposition of the plaintiff at an agreed-upon date and time, and discovery requests.

It is reported that the plaintiff did not respond. As such, in May 2017, the defendant served the plaintiff with a 90-day demand to file a note of issue. The parties’ attorneys had several discussions regarding the scheduling of the plaintiff’s deposition and set a date and time, but the defendant ultimately canceled the deposition. The plaintiff’s attorney sent a letter to the defendant’s attorney with a proposed scheduling order stating that a note of issue would be filed by December of 2017, but the defendant’s attorney did not respond. The parties had no communication until April 2019, when the defendant filed a motion to dismiss. The trial court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Proximate Cause in Car Accident Cases

Published on: February 7, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In most Syracuse personal injury cases, the plaintiff will allege that the defendant acted negligently. Merely proving negligence is not sufficient to demonstrate liability, though. Instead, a plaintiff must establish that the defendant’s negligence proximately caused their harm, and if they do not, their claims may fail. This was demonstrated in a recent ruling issued by a New York court in a car accident case. If you were injured in a collision, it is smart to speak to a Syracuse personal injury lawyer to determine what evidence you must produce to recover damages.

The Plaintiff’s Accident and Allegations

It is reported that the plaintiff was riding his bicycle when he struck the side of the defendant’s bus. He sustained harm in the accident and subsequently filed a personal injury lawsuit against the defendant and the driver employed by the defendant. The case proceeded to trial, after which the jury determined that the defendants were negligent, but their negligence was not a significant factor in bringing about the accident. The plaintiff then filed a motion to set aside the jury’s verdict and for a judgment as a matter of law, or alternatively for a new trial. The trial court denied the motion, and the plaintiff appealed.

Establishing Proximate Cause

The appellate court ultimately denied the plaintiff’s appeal. It noted that the plaintiff failed to object to the verdict as inconsistent with the evidence prior to when the jury was discharged, and therefore waived his right to object on that basis. The appellate court elaborated that, regardless, the jury’s assessment that the defendants acted negligently but their negligence did not cause the collision was not against the weight of the evidence. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Evaluates Summary Judgment in Medical Malpractice Cases with Conflicting Expert Reports

Published on: February 4, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Expert testimony is essential in New York medical malpractice cases. Specifically, the success of a plaintiff’s claims may hinge on the strength of their expert’s opinion. Similarly, defendants often rely on expert opinions in support of their assertion that they should not be deemed liable for the plaintiff’s harm. In cases in which expert opinions conflict, the courts will typically deny any motions for judgment as a matter of law. If they do not, it may be grounds for reversal, as demonstrated in a recent ruling issued in a New York hospital malpractice action. If you were injured due to negligent care in a hospital, it is smart to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer about what evidence you need to recover damages.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent visited the emergency department of the defendant hospital with complaints of swelling in her legs. The defendant doctor diagnosed her with peripheral vascular disease and discharged her. The decedent’s condition initially improved, but nine days later, she visited a second emergency department, again complaining of swelling in both legs. An ultrasound showed that she had acute deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in both legs.

Reportedly, shortly after the examination, she suffered a cardiac arrest and died. An autopsy later revealed DVT to be the cause of her death. The plaintiff subsequently filed a lawsuit against the defendants, asserting medical malpractice and wrongful death claims. The defendants moved for summary judgment, and the trial court granted their motion, after which the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›