Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog

New York Court Affirms Dismissal of Medical Malpractice Claim on Statute of Limitations Grounds

Published on: December 16, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

It is frequently said that “time is of the essence” when it comes to medical malpractice lawsuits in New York, especially those involving governmental entities. While it is certainly true that Syracuse medical malpractice claims should be made in a timely fashion in order to have a reasonable chance of a successful outcome, there are, in a few, very limited circumstances, some exceptions to the general rule regarding the time period for filing suit.

However, these limitations are subject to judicial interpretation, and the case law concerning the rules allowing for an exception can evolve over time. This happened in a recent case, as set forth below.

It was unclear exactly when the alleged act of medical negligence took place, but the case had apparently been in litigation for many years. Had the plaintiff acted in a more timely fashion, it is possible that the matter would have been resolved much sooner.

New York Court Agrees That Plaintiff’s Car Wreck Case Failed to Meet Exception to No-Fault Statute

Published on: December 14, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

The state of New York is considered a “no-fault” state for insurance purposes. This means that, unless a driver or passenger who is hurt in a Syracuse car accident falls under a limited number of exceptions set forth under state law, he or she cannot recover money damages from the negligent driver who caused the crash.

However, it is important to note that “no-fault” does not completely foreclose the possibility of litigation following an accident. It simply means that the plaintiff must qualify under the relevant statutory framework in order to pursue a claim in court against the responsible driver.

As might be expected, disputes frequently arise regarding whether or not a given case should be litigated or should fall under “no-fault” rules. The trial court is typically called upon to make the initial determination on this issue, but the appeals court may eventually be asked to weigh in, as well.

Because of Lack of Constructive Notice, Dismissal of Premises Liability Case is Affirmed on Appeal by New York Court

Published on: December 5, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Property owners and those that own businesses have certain obligations to the public. While stores, restaurants, and shops aren’t the insurers of every individual who sets foot on their premises, they do have a responsibility to take reasonable measures to prevent harm to others.

In many cases, the resolution of whether or not the business or landowner is liable for a guest’s Syracuse premises liability accident depends upon how long the allegedly dangerous condition existed. Even if the property owner did not have actual notice of the condition, there could still be liability if “constructive” notice was present.

Constructive notice exists when a condition was in place long enough for a reasonably prudent business or landowner to have become aware of the danger and taken steps to correct it. The exact time necessary for constructive notice to be present is usually dependent upon the facts of a specific case.

Internal Medicine Physician Should Have Been Granted Summary Judgment in Medical Malpractice Case, Says New York Appellate Court

Published on: November 25, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Not every physician or healthcare provider is held to the same standard of care. For instance, in a Syracuse medical malpractice case, a doctor specializing in internal medicine is not necessarily expected to have the same knowledge or skill as one who works primarily in the field of physical therapy.

Thus, if a patient who is treated by both professionals is injured by an act of negligence, it is quite possible that a medical malpractice case will only reach trial as to one of the healthcare workers. It often comes down to a question of which specialist was responsible for the area of the body or the type of care that led to the harm about which the plaintiff complains.

Of course, there are some circumstances in which several different medical professionals could be potentially liable to a patient. Each case is unique and must be determined on its own particular facts.

New York Appellate Division Affirms Denial of Summary Judgment to Store Owner in Premises Liability Suit

Published on: November 19, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Property owners have certain duties to the general public, especially those who come upon their premises for a business purpose (such as a customer shopping in a store). When the landowner or property manager does not maintain a place of business in a reasonably safe manner, a person injured thereby may have grounds to file a Syracuse premises liability claim.

It is important to seek legal counsel as soon as possible after such an accident, as spoliation of the evidence can create challenges later on as the plaintiff seeks to establish a case of liability. Photos should be taken of the scene, witnesses should be interviewed, and any surveillance video should be preserved.

An attorney experienced in such matters can be a great asset to a person injured on another’s property. Together, the injured person and his or her counsel can build as strong a case as possible against the landowner as the case progresses towards a trial by jury.

New York Appellate Division Affirms Large Verdict in Birth Injury Medical Malpractice Case

Published on: November 14, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

A patient can be the victim of medical negligence at any time in his or her life. Sometimes, nursing homes fail to meet the standard of care, and an elderly patient suffers as a result. At the other end of the spectrum, some Syracuse medical malpractice cases happen much earlier: during birth.

When a baby is harmed during labor and delivery, he or she may literally face a lifetime of medical expenses, pain and suffering, emotional distress, disfigurement, and other issues. If these expenses are the result of a medical provider’s mistake, it is only fair that the provider contribute to the payment of such damages.

The amount of fair compensation that is due under such circumstances can be a matter of much contention. After a jury has made an award, it is not unusual for there to be an adjustment of the verdict by the trial court and/or the appellate tribunal if the amount awarded was not in line with the evidence presented at trial. Sometimes, the damages award is set aside, and a new trial is ordered.

Summary Judgment Reversed in New York Medical Malpractice Claim Pertaining to Testicular Injury

Published on: November 10, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

We depend heavily upon the expertise of doctors and hospital personnel to properly diagnose and treat our medical conditions, illnesses, and injuries. Most of the time, they do, and we are grateful for their help.

Sometimes, however, mistakes are made, and the patient suffers great physical harm, pain, and suffering as a result. Most hospitals and physicians carry medical malpractice insurance that covers them in such situations, if the injured person is able to make out a claim for medical malpractice.

However, proving negligence against a medical provider is not always easy. Medical experts must be retained, records must be reviewed, and various court proceedings are likely to ensue if the case is not settled early.

New York Court Says Motorist Should Have Been Awarded Summary Judgment in Passenger’s Personal Injury Suit

Published on: November 6, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

A Syracuse car accident can happen in just a few seconds, changing the course of a crash victim’s life in ways from which he or she may never recover. Expensive medical treatment, time off from work, and travel costs back and forth to the doctor can be financially devastating.

It is important to know that, if you are hurt in a wreck that was not your fault, there is the possibility of filing suit against the responsible individual. Of course, the burden is on the plaintiff to prove his or her case by a preponderance of the evidence, and the defendant may be able to assert a defense to the claim.

Assuming that there are genuine issues of material fact presented by the parties, the issues will ultimately be decided by a jury or a judge as the finder of fact. At trial, a judgment will be rendered in favor of one party or the other; if the plaintiff prevails, the judge or jury will probably also award a certain dollar figure in money damages to the injured party.

New York Appellate Tribunal Dismisses Mother’s Medical Malpractice Case Asserting Anesthesiology Error During Labor

Published on: October 29, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Syracuse medical malpractice cases often come down to a “battle of the experts.” The case begins with the plaintiff’s medical professional witness testifying that the defendant failed to follow the standard of care and, as a result, harmed the patient.

The defendant then puts his or her own expert witness on the stand, and a very different opinion is given. The jury, as the finder of fact, has to resolve the conflicting testimony.

Sometimes, however, the case doesn’t make it that far. Via a process called “summary judgment,” the trial court may decide that the expert opinion offered by the plaintiff is not sufficient to get the case in front of a jury.

New York County Was Proper Venue for Medical Malpractice Lawsuit, Despite Defendant’s Objection

Published on: October 23, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

One of the first considerations in filing a Syracuse medical malpractice lawsuit is the proper party or parties to name as defendants. Another important issue that may need to be addressed is the correct court for purposes of jurisdiction and/or venue.

When a defendant disagrees with the plaintiff’s choice of forum, he or she may seek a change of venue. Even if such a motion is not successful, the filing of such a motion can cause a delay in the plaintiff’s attempt to seek fair compensation.

If the motion is successful, the case may continue in another court. Unfortunately, that court may be less convenient or less desirable from the plaintiff’s perspective. A party who is dissatisfied with a trial court’s ruling on an issue of venue may have an option to seek appellate review prior to trial.