Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog

Expert testimony is essential in a medical malpractice case, and without it, a plaintiff most likely cannot establish liability or damages. As such, if the court refuses to allow a plaintiff’s expert to testify, it will most likely cripple their case. While there may be grounds for precluding some of an expert’s testimony, barring it all together is not favored, and such actions may be reversed on appeal, as demonstrated in a recent New York medical malpractice case. If you sustained losses due to the incompetence of a doctor, it is wise to contact a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to discuss your options for seeking damages.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

Allegedly, the plaintiff visited the defendant hospital when she was 21 weeks pregnant. The defendant doctor diagnosed her with inevitable abortion and potential chorioamnionitis, which is an inflammation of tissue in the uterus caused by an infection. She opted not to terminate the pregnancy. She was evaluated two additional times over the following day and again diagnosed with inevitable abortion but was advised that chorioamnionitis was unlikely. She then opted to induce labor to expedite the inevitable abortion.

Reportedly, the plaintiff was induced and gave birth to a stillborn child, A study of the fetal tissue did not reveal evidence of chorioamnionitis. The plaintiff then filed medical malpractice and lack of informed consent claims against the defendants. The case eventually proceeded to trial, and the court precluded the plaintiff’s expert from testifying, as some of his proposed testimony fell outside of the scope of his report. The jury found in favor of the defendants, and the plaintiff moved to vacate the judgment and order a new trial. The trial court denied the motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

When a patient suffers harm after receiving medical care, their inclination may be to seek compensation from the provider that they believe caused their harm. Merely because a plaintiff sustained injuries does not mean that they will be able to establish that their losses were caused by medical malpractice, though. This was illustrated in a ruling issued by a New York court in a hospital malpractice matter. If you were hurt by the negligence of your health care providers, it is prudent to confer with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer about your options.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff gave birth to an infant at the defendant hospital. The defendant doctor delivered the infant and the plaintiff’s placenta, which appeared to be intact. Following the delivery, the plaintiff declined to let the defendant doctor examine her uterus and left the hospital against medical advice. She returned two weeks later, however, reporting that she had been bleeding heavily for five days.

It is reported that the plaintiff was diagnosed with a condition where the tissue of her retained placenta grew into the wall of her uterus and had to undergo a hysterectomy. She subsequently filed medical malpractice claims against the defendants. The defendants moved for summary judgment, and the court granted their motions. The plaintiff then appealed. Continue Reading ›

Patients that receive inadequate care in a hospital emergency room and suffer harm as a result may be able to pursue medical malpractice claims against both the hospital and the doctors that rendered their care. Whether a hospital will be deemed vicariously liable for a patient’s harm depends on numerous factors, though, as discussed in a New York opinion recently issued in a hospital malpractice case. If you suffered harm due to the carelessness of doctors working in a hospital, you have the right to seek compensation for your losses, and you should consult a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer as soon as possible.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is alleged that the plaintiff went to the defendant hospital with complaints of pain in her left elbow following a fall. The defendant attending physicians determined she dislocated her elbow and performed procedures to reduce her elbow, and then discharged her. The plaintiff returned to the defendant hospital later that evening, reporting increased pain and swelling. She was examined by the defendant orthopedist, who determined she should be evaluated by a vascular specialist and transferred her to another hospital.

Reportedly, the plaintiff’s left arm ultimately had to be amputated below the elbow. She filed a complaint against the defendants asserting, among other things, that the defendant hospital should be held vicariously liable for the medical malpractice of the defendant doctors. The defendants filed separate motions for summary judgment, and their motions were denied in part and granted in part. The parties filed various appeals. Continue Reading ›

Typically, a plaintiff in a medical malpractice case will submit their claims to a judge rather than a jury. There is always a risk that a jury could issue a ruling that does not comport with the evidence presented, but in such instances, the law allows a party to move to set aside the verdict and seek a new trial. A party moving for such relief faces a high burden of proof, however, as discussed in a recent New York medical malpractice case in which the court denied the plaintiff’s motion to set aside an unfavorable ruling. If you suffered losses due to incompetent medical care, you could be owed damages, and it is smart to confer with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to assess your rights.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the defendant doctor prescribed the plaintiff, who was 34 years old, birth control pills. The plaintiff later suffered a stroke. She then filed a lawsuit against the defendant, asserting claims of negligence and lack of informed consent. The case proceeded to trial, and the jury issued a verdict in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff moved to set aside the verdict as against the weight of the evidence, or in the alternative, to set aside the verdict and grant judgment in her favor as a matter of law. The court denied her motion, and she appealed.

Establishing That a Medical Malpractice Verdict Should be Set Aside

Under New York law, a motion to set aside a verdict and grant judgment as a matter of law will only be granted if there are no permissible inferences or valid line of reasoning that could potentially lead a rational jury to the conclusion made based on the evidence that was presented at the trial. Continue Reading ›

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. Continue Reading ›

It is not uncommon for people harmed by incompetent medical treatment to suffer other injuries at the hands of the parties responsible for their care. As such, they may assert medical malpractice claims along with other causes of action in a single lawsuit, usually in federal court. Federal courts have limited jurisdiction, however. As such, if a plaintiff fails to demonstrate the court’s exercise of jurisdiction over their state law medical malpractice claims is proper, they may be dismissed. This was demonstrated recently in an opinion issued by a New York court. If you sustained losses due to incompetent medical care, you should contact a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to determine what causes of action you may be able to assert against your health care provider.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff was admitted to a medical facility where he was administered a pain reliever. He subsequently developed bleeding in the intestinal tract that caused him to die on three occasions. He was revived each time and ultimately underwent life-saving surgery. He developed significant side effects after the surgery, however, including dementia, blurred vision, and mobility issues. He subsequently filed a federal lawsuit against the defendants, alleging numerous claims, including medical malpractice. The court then evaluated whether it had jurisdiction over his claims.

Federal Jurisdiction Over State Law Medical Malpractice Claims

The court noted that the plaintiff set forth state medical malpractice claims in his complaint. He failed, however, to assert facts demonstrating that the court had subject matter jurisdiction over such claims. The court explained that, as a federal court, it had limited jurisdiction, as established by 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1332. Pursuant to those statutes, federal courts can only exercise jurisdiction over matters in which a federal question is presented or where the plaintiff and defendants are citizens of different states, and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. Continue Reading ›