Serving Clients Throughout Upstate New York with Multiple Convenient Locations Syracuse | Oneida | Watertown | New Hartford | Binghamton | Cortland | Rochester | Oswego | Albany | Buffalo

People involved in car crashes will often pursue claims from the parties they deem responsible for the collision. In order to recover damages, though, a plaintiff in a car accident case must not only demonstrate fault for the crash, but they must also show that the crash proximately caused them to suffer actual losses. If they cannot establish both liability and damages, they may be denied compensation, as demonstrated in a recent New York ruling issued in a car accident case. If you were injured in a collision, you should meet with a Syracuse personal injury attorney to discuss what evidence you must produce to obtain a favorable outcome.

The History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff was driving a vehicle when he was struck from behind by a truck owned by the defendant postal service and operated by one of its drivers. The plaintiff subsequently commenced a personal injury lawsuit against the defendant, alleging that the accident caused him to suffer significant harm. The case proceeded to a bench trial, after which the judge issued a verdict in favor of the defendant on the grounds that the plaintiff failed to show that his injuries were caused by the accident. The plaintiff appealed.

Establishing Damages in a Car Accident case

On appeal, the court affirmed the trial court ruling. It explained that it reviews a district court’s ruling that was the subject of an appeal for clear error and examines its legal conclusions de novo. Pursuant to the clear error standard, there is a strong presumption that the trial court’s findings are fact and should be upheld, and the presumption will not be disturbed absent a firm and definite conviction that the court has made a mistake. Continue Reading ›

The federal government funds many medical facilities in New York; as such, the healthcare providers that work in such facilities are often considered federal employees. Whether a physician works for a private or public corporation matters, in part, if the physician engages in behavior that constitutes malpractice, as it impacts how a plaintiff must pursue claims against them. This was demonstrated recently in a New York medical malpractice case in which the court dismissed the plaintiff’s lawsuit on the grounds that she failed to exhaust her administrative remedies prior to pursuing claims against the defendant. If you suffered harm because of a doctor’s carelessness, it is advisable to consult a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to discuss your possible remedies.

Procedural Background of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff treated with the defendant doctor during her pregnancy. Tragically, the plaintiff’s son suffered injuries at birth, including brain damage, cerebral palsy, seizures, and the inability to walk. The plaintiff attributed the infant’s injuries to the defendant’s failure to perform an emergency C-section. During the relevant period, the defendant worked for a health center that received federal funding.

Reportedly, approximately two years after the infant’s birth, the plaintiff submitted an administrative claim to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Six weeks later, she instituted a medical malpractice claim against the defendant in state court. HHS did not issue a written determination regarding the claim at that time. The United States removed the case to federal court. It then moved to substitute itself as a defendant and dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint due to her failure to exhaust her administrative remedies. Continue Reading ›

People that suffer losses due to medical malpractice have the right to pursue claims against the healthcare providers responsible for their harm. They must file any claims within the applicable statute of limitations, though; otherwise, they might waive the right to recover damages. While the courts strictly construe statutes of limitations, when a cause of action begins to accrue will vary depending on the facts of the case. Recently, a New York court discussed the statute of limitations imposed on a plaintiff pursuing medical malpractice and wrongful death claims in a case in which the plaintiff sought reversal of the dismissal of her claims. If you suffered harm because of the negligence of a doctor, it is in your best interest to meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to determine your possible claims.

Procedural Background of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent died of liver cancer in 2013. Prior to his death, he treated with the defendant primary care physician, the defendant oncologist, and the defendant radiologist. Slightly less than two years after the decedent’s death, the plaintiff commenced a lawsuit against the defendants, asserting wrongful death and medical malpractice claims. Following discovery, the defendants each moved for dismissal via summary judgment on the grounds that the claims against them were barred by the applicable statute of limitations. The trial court granted the motions and the plaintiff appealed.

Statutes of Limitations for Medical Malpractice and Wrongful Death Claims

On appeal, the court affirmed the trial court ruling as to the plaintiff’s medical malpractice claims but reversed it with regard to the wrongful death claims. The court explained that pursuant to New York law, medical malpractice claims must be brought within two years and six months of the harmful act or omission, or if there is continuous treatment for an injury or illness, within two years and six months of the last treatment. Continue Reading ›

When multi-vehicle collisions occur, there is often more than one party at fault. As such, people injured in such accidents will often name multiple parties as defendants. Simply because one defendant bears a portion of responsibility for a car crash does not mean that the other defendants cannot be deemed liable as well, as noted in an opinion recently issued by a New York court in a car accident case. If you sustained injuries in a crash involving several vehicles, it is wise to confer with a Syracuse personal injury lawyer regarding your rights.

Facts and Procedure

It is reported that the plaintiff was driving on a New York parkway when she was involved in an accident with two other vehicles. She suffered injuries in the crash and subsequently filed a personal injury lawsuit against the drivers of the other cars. One of the defendants moved for summary judgment, asking the court to dismiss the claims against her. The court granted her motion, and the plaintiff appealed.

Proximate Cause in Car Accident Cases

On appeal, the court reversed the trial court ruling. The court explained that a defendant seeking summary judgment on a negligence claim arising out of a car crash bears the burden of proving, prima facie, that they were not at fault for the accident occurring. Continue Reading ›

After people undergo surgical procedures, it is critical that they receive appropriate care. Thus, if healthcare providers fail to take the post-surgical measures necessary to prevent them from developing infections and other complications, they may be liable for medical malpractice. The standard of care imposed on medical professionals providing post-operative treatment was the topic of a recent opinion delivered by a New York court in a medical malpractice case. If you were hurt by inadequate medical care, you have the right to pursue claims against the parties that caused your losses, and it is wise to talk to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney promptly.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff sought treatment from the defendant doctor for arthritis in his right hip. The defendant doctor recommended that the plaintiff undergo hip replacement surgery; the plaintiff consented to the procedure, which the defendant performed without incident. The plaintiff remained in the hospital for several days following the surgery, where he was monitored and cared for by the defendant doctor and defendant physician assistant.

Allegedly, the defendant developed a decubitus ulcer on his buttocks during his admission that required further hospitalization and extensive care. He subsequently filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendants, arguing they deviated from the standard of care, causing him to develop the decubitus ulcer. The defendants moved for summary judgment, but the court denied their motion. The defendants appealed. Continue Reading ›

The COVID-19 pandemic altered many aspects of everyday life, including the manner in which medical malpractice cases are litigated. Specifically, among other things, it generally increased the length of time parties had to pursue claims against negligent medical professionals. In a recent opinion issued in a medical malpractice case, a New York court clarified that the executive orders issued by the Governor during the pandemic tolled, rather than suspended, the statute of limitations. If you sustained losses because of a doctor’s carelessness, it is wise to confer with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to evaluate your possible causes of action.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent underwent treatment with the defendants in May 2018. The opinion did not elaborate on the nature of the decedent’s health concerns; regardless, the decedent passed away in September 2018 due to complications associated with her care. The plaintiff commenced a medical malpractice action against the defendant in November 2020 and served an amended complaint naming additional parties that treated the plaintiff as defendants in February 2021.

It is reported that the defendants named in the February 2021 complaint moved for dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims on the grounds that they were barred by the applicable statute of limitations. The trial court denied the motion and the defendant appealed. Continue Reading ›

People harmed by negligent medical care have the right to pursue medical malpractice claims against their providers, but they must act promptly; otherwise, their claims may be dismissed as untimely. Specifically, under New York law, medical malpractice lawsuits must be filed within two years and six months of the date of the alleged harm. Certain exceptions may apply, though, like the continuous treatment doctrine, that allow for the tolling of the statute of limitations. Recently, a New York court discussed the continuous treatment doctrine in a case in which it denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims as untimely. If you suffered harm because of a doctor’s incompetence, it is wise to talk to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer as soon as possible to determine what claims you may be able to pursue.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff presented to the defendant institute in October 2007 for assessment of head and neck pain. The defendant’s doctors diagnosed her with numerous disorders and recommended that she receive treatment at the defendant hospital. She subsequently underwent five surgical procedures at the defendant hospital between May 2008 and November 2012.

Reportedly, the plaintiff was misdiagnosed, and the surgeries were unnecessary. As such, she filed a lawsuit against the defendants, asserting medical malpractice and lack of informed consent claims. After the parties conducted discovery, the defendants moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the plaintiff’s claims were untimely. The trial court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

In New York medical malpractice cases, defendants will often not only deny liability but will ask the courts to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims against them on the grounds that they cannot be deemed liable as a matter of law. If a court finds that there are factual disputes that need to be resolved by a jury, however, it will deny a defendant’s request for judgment in their favor, as shown in a recent New York ruling issued in a medical malpractice case. If you were hurt because a doctor rendered your care in a negligent manner, you should speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to determine what evidence you must offer to recover damages.

The Facts of the Case

Allegedly, the decedent underwent a routine cholecystectomy at the defendant’s medical center. She was discharged the same day as the procedure. The next day, she was taken by ambulance to the emergency department of the medical center with complaints of abdominal and chest pain that worsened with breathing. She was examined and underwent tests, after which it was determined that she did not have a pulmonary embolism.

It is reported that the decedent was diagnosed with pleuritic chest pain and discharged. Tragically, one week later, she passed away due to a pulmonary embolism. Her estate subsequently filed a wrongful death and medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant. Following discovery, the defendant moved for summary judgment in its favor. The trial court denied the motion, and the defendant appealed. Continue Reading ›

An inaccurate diagnosis can lead to improper treatment, the progression of illnesses, and other losses. While, in most instances, harm is caused by a missed diagnosis, patients can also suffer injuries if they are incorrectly diagnosed with an illness that they do not have. Recently, a New York court examined whether the administration of hospice care following an erroneous cancer diagnosis constitutes medical malpractice, ultimately determining that it did not. If you suffered harm because of a missed or wrong diagnosis, you might be owed damages, and you should speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney about your possible causes of action.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations

It is alleged that the plaintiff presented to the defendant cancer center to determine whether he had pancreatic cancer. Six months later, he presented to the defendant hospice center with complaints of weakness and abdominal pain and, per the hospice center, a diagnosis of Stage IV pancreatic cancer. The plaintiff underwent an evaluation and was admitted to the hospice floor for ninety days. After forty days, he was transferred to the defendant palliative care center, where he was monitored by the defendant doctor.

Reportedly, the defendant did not have pancreatic cancer. As such, he subsequently filed a lawsuit against the defendants asserting several causes of action, including medical malpractice. The defendant doctor center moved for summary judgment. Continue Reading ›

Accidents frequently occur at construction sites, and in many instances, they cause significant harm. While ordinarily, people seeking damages for personal injuries must prove another party’s negligence caused their harm, New York has laws that allow for the imposition of strict liability for certain harm encountered on construction sites. Specifically, the scaffold law requires contractors and site owners to provide certain protections to workers, and if they neglect to employ the required safety measures, they may be deemed responsible for any harm that arises. Recently, a New York court discussed the scaffold law, in a matter in which it granted summary judgment in favor of an injured contractor. If you sustained losses due to an accident caused by another party’s carelessness, it is smart to talk to a Syracuse personal injury lawyer about your potential claims.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is alleged that the plaintiff, who was a plumber mechanic, was working on the property owner’s construction site. The property owner’s related company acted as the construction manager for the project, the construction of townhouses, and hired subcontractors to install concrete and plumbing at the project, and the plumbing subcontractor, in turn, subcontracted their work to the plaintiff’s employer.

Reportedly, the plaintiff was performing a walkthrough of the project to determine what needed to be done. He stepped on a metallic plate between two townhouses to move from one house to another. The plate moved, causing the plaintiff to fall ten feet. He suffered injuries in the fall and subsequently filed a personal injury lawsuit against the property owner, contractor, and subcontractors. All parties subsequently moved for summary judgment in their favor. Continue Reading ›

Contact Information