Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog

New York Court Rejects Motorist’s Request for Summary Judgment Based on Emergency Doctrine in Car Crash Case

Published on: October 17, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

The basic question in a Syracuse care accident case is, did the defendant act reasonably under the circumstances? In deciding this issue, the trier of fact is usually given as much information as possible about the circumstances leading up to the collision.

If the defendant was confronted with some type of emergency – such as another car pulling out directly in front of him or her – this fact may be weighed, along with other pertinent information, in deciding whether the defendant was negligent. It is quite possible that a jury could find that, although an emergency did exist, the defendant’s reaction to the situation was not reasonable.

Facts of the Case

In a case arising in the Supreme Court for Monroe County and considered on appeal by the Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department, the plaintiff was a woman who was allegedly injured in a car accident. According to the plaintiff’s complaint, the defendant motorist was at fault in causing the accident. The defendant vehicle owner was also named as a party defendant in the lawsuit. The defendants filed a motion asking the trial court to dismiss the complaint against them on the grounds that the facts of the accident should result in the application of the “emergency doctrine,” thus excusing them for liability for the plaintiff’s alleged injuries.

New York Appellate Division Rules Against Hip Surgery Patient Who Allegedly Had Recurrent MRSA Infection Following Surgery

Published on: October 15, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

A Syracuse hospital malpractice case may be based on one or several alleged breaches of the duty of care towards a patient. Failing to properly diagnose and treat an infection is one possible issue that could arise in such a case.

In order to prove negligence against a medical provider, the burden of proof rests on the plaintiff to establish, by expert proof, the duty of care that was applicable to the patient at the time in question. The plaintiff must also show that this duty was breached and that the breach of duty was the proximate cause of the injuries for which he or she seeks monetary compensation in the lawsuit at hand.

If the plaintiff is unable to produce competent and convincing medical expert testimony to support his or her theory of negligence, his or her case is likely to get dismissed on the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. In such a situation, the plaintiff’s case will not reach the jury, and he or she will receive $0 in compensation.

Appellate Tribunal Says New York Trial Court Acted Appropriately in Entering Judgment on Defense Verdict in Car Accident Case

Published on: October 9, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Filing a Syracuse car accident lawsuit is just one of many steps towards recovering fair compensation for medical costs, lost earnings, and other losses caused by a negligent driver. Because New York is a “no-fault” state, there are certain thresholds that must be met in order for the plaintiff to be able to assert his or her claim in a court of law.

The insurance companies who defend such cases try very hard to keep cases out of court, if at all possible. They have teams of professionals, including medical experts, who work together to minimize the amount of money that is ultimately paid to those who are hurt in automobile accidents.

If you have been involved in a car crash recently, you should talk to a lawyer who can represent your interests in the matter as soon as possible – preferably, before giving a statement to the other driver’s insurance company. Insurance adjusters are well-seasoned in the art of manipulating a would-be plaintiff’s statement, as well as in other tactics to keep the insurance company’s payout as small as possible.

New York Court Upholds Dismissal of Car Accident Case on Summary Judgment Due to Plaintiff’s Untimely Opposition to Motion

Published on: September 23, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Timeliness is very important at every juncture of a car accident lawsuit. From the filing of the initial complaint, to responding to pre-trial motions, and on the appellate process, time is of the essence.

Those who fail to timely pursue their litigation against an allegedly negligent party will likely meet with a very harsh result. This can include total dismissal of what might otherwise have been a sound and potentially valuable cause of action.

Speaking with a Syracuse car accident attorney as soon as possible after a motor vehicle crash can go a long way towards ensuring that your case proceeds in a timely fashion. While exceptions are sometimes made for late filings, such is the exception – the very rare exception – rather than the rule.

Court Grants Partial Summary Judgment in Case Seeking to Avoid Limitations of New York’s No-Fault Law After Car Accident

Published on: September 18, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

New York is considered a “no-fault” state for purposes of automobile accident litigation. However, that does not mean that there is no possibility of filing a Syracuse car accident lawsuit against a negligent driver in which an innocent motorist, passenger, or pedestrian suffers serious personal injuries or wrongful death.

There are several situations that take a vehicular accident outside of the limitations of no-fault. While each case must stand on its own facts, generally speaking the more serious the plaintiff’s injuries are and the more short or long-term disability the plaintiff has due to the crash, the more likely it is that he or she can get past the no-fault threshold and file a traditional negligence lawsuit against the responsible party.

In such situations, the plaintiff may seek payment for his or her medical expenses and lost wages, as well as compensation for pain and suffering and other damages. The injured party’s spouse may also be able to seek monetary damages for loss of consortium.

New York Appellate Tribunal Agrees that Summary Judgment Would Be Improper in Failure to Diagnosis Cancer Case

Published on: September 15, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Negligence cases, including Syracuse medical malpractice claims, often come down to one or two basic issues. Did the defendant breach a standard of care owed to the plaintiff? Was this the proximate cause of the harm that he or she complains about in the lawsuit?

Proving fault in professional negligence cases usually involves the testimony of one or more expert witnesses. One or both parties may seek an early resolution of the case through a pre-trial procedure known as “summary judgment,” but this is only appropriate when there are no genuine issues of material fact.

When factual issues must be resolved, the case should go to the jury, rather than be resolved by the judge without the plaintiff having his or her day in court. This is also true when the parties’ respective expert witnesses starkly disagree about the duty that was owed by the defendant to the plaintiff, whether this duty was breached, and/or whether such breach of duty was the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s damages.

New York Woman’s Medical Malpractice Case Arising from Misdiagnosis Partially Dismissed on Statute of Limitations Grounds

Published on: September 10, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Timeliness is of the essence in a Syracuse medical malpractice lawsuit. If a claim is not filed within the time allowed by law, it will eventually be dismissed by the courts, regardless of its merits.

Because of this, it is critically important that anyone who believes that they or a family member may have been hurt by the negligence of a doctor, nurse, hospital, or other medical provider seek timely legal advice about his or her case. An attorney experienced in these types of cases can provide the would-be plaintiff with important information about filing deadlines and other requirements.

An experienced malpractice attorney can also guide the plaintiff through the investigative phase of his or her case, helping secure medical records and consulting with potential expert witnesses who can testify on the plaintiff’s behalf at trial.

Summary Judgment in Favor of New York Doctor and Medical Practice Affirmed – Court Hints Result Might Have Different if Autopsy Had Been Performed

Published on: August 28, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Perhaps the most important thing that a patient should know about a Syracuse medical malpractice case is that, if something goes wrong and he or she feels the need to sue a medical provider for negligence, it is the patient who bears the burden of proof. This is true even though the doctor was the professional, and the patient was the layperson.

In order to prove his or her case, the plaintiff will need to obtain his or her medical records, have another medical professional review them, and have that expert witness testify at trial as to the mistakes that were made and how they affected the plaintiff. This is a difficult task and one that almost always requires the help of legal counsel.

An attorney who regularly practices in this area of the law can guide the injured person through an investigation of his or her claim, help the patient secure the necessary records, and work with potential expert witnesses to build the plaintiff’s case. This can be a protracted process, so it is important that a person who has been hurt by an act of medical negligence seek counsel right away.

New York Court Agrees that Summary Judgment Was Not Warranted in Multi-Car Crash

Published on: August 22, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Car accidents can happen in so many ways – head on collisions, T-bones, and rear-end wrecks, just to name a few. Some Syracuse car accidents result from “chain reaction” or “multi-vehicle” crashes in which not just one or two but potentially several vehicles are involved.

The challenge in any accident case is figuring out which party was at fault, or, if more than one individual, business, or governmental entity contributed to the cause of the crash, the relative fault between them. This can be an especially challenging task when there was not just one, but perhaps a series of accidents, all happening in rapid succession.

As much as one or more of the drivers involved in a multi-car crash might prefer not to be included as a defendant because he or she believes that most or all of the fault for the wreck should be assigned to others, sometimes it is necessary to include all parties involved in the accident, at least until the evidence has been fully developed. Then, if the case proceeds to trial, the jury can assign fault based on the testimony of the various parties, the physical evidence, the opinions of expert witnesses, and the like.

New York Appellate Tribunal Finds No Reason to Disturb Trial Court’s Entry of Jury’s Verdict for the Defendant in Medical Malpractice Case

Published on: August 18, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

When a Syracuse medical malpractice case is tried to a jury, one party or the other will likely be unhappy with the jury’s verdict. After all, if the parties were in agreement about the issues of the case, there likely would have been a settlement rather than a trial.

The party who comes out on the losing end of the case has the right to seek appellate review of the trial court’s decision. Of course, winning an appeal is not an easy task.

Much deference is to be given to the jury’s verdict. Only when a reversible error is made in the court below may the jury’s verdict or the trial court’s entry of judgment thereon be disturbed on appeal.