Syracuse Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Medical malpractice claims in New York often hinge on whether expert testimony establishes both a deviation from accepted medical standards and causation. If a defendant offers competent expert evidence showing that care was appropriate and that no harm resulted from any alleged error, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to offer a meaningful rebuttal. A recent decision from a New York court demonstrates this principle, as the court upheld the dismissal of a case involving postoperative complications, finding that the plaintiff’s opposition lacked the necessary expert support to proceed. If you suffered harm after surgery and believe your care was mishandled, it is critical to consult an experienced Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to protect your rights.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent surgery for the removal of a tumor located on his adrenal gland. The procedure was performed by the defendant surgeon, who was employed by a university-affiliated hospital. Following the operation, the plaintiff developed complications, including a hematoma and nerve damage, which allegedly caused ongoing pain and functional limitations.

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant surgeon and his employer, asserting that the defendants failed to properly perform the adrenalectomy and failed to adequately manage his postoperative condition. The complaint alleged that this conduct fell below the applicable standard of medical care and directly resulted in the plaintiff’s injuries. Continue Reading ›

Medical malpractice verdicts must rest on legally sufficient evidence linking a physician’s conduct to a patient’s injuries. In other words, even when a jury finds a departure from accepted standards of care, that finding must be supported by proof that the departure caused harm. The importance of establishing proximate cause through expert testimony was illustrated by a recent New York ruling in which the court overturned a jury verdict in favor of a plaintiff who alleged inadequate treatment of an eye condition, holding that the evidence at trial failed to support the required legal standard. If you believe you were injured due to negligent medical treatment, you should consult with a seasoned Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to evaluate your case.

Factual and Procedural Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent LASIK eye surgery in September 2014 by a third-party physician and remained under that provider’s care until late October 2014. On October 27, 2014, the plaintiff began treatment with the defendant, an ophthalmologist, for post-surgical complications. These complications included symptoms suggestive of diffuse lamellar keratitis, a noninfectious inflammatory condition affecting the cornea.

It is alleged that the plaintiff’s condition worsened, and by November 18, 2014, she was under the care of a third ophthalmologist who took a culture from her right eye. On December 1, 2014, she was diagnosed with infectious keratitis, and shortly thereafter, she began antibiotic treatment. The plaintiff initiated a medical malpractice action against multiple parties, including the defendant physician and his professional corporation, claiming that they failed to diagnose and treat the infection appropriately by not performing a culture during her care. Continue Reading ›

In emergency care settings, medical providers must quickly evaluate and treat injuries based on available information. However, patients also bear responsibility for following through with recommended care, and if they fail to do so, it may undermine any medical malpractice claims they later choose to pursue, as demonstrated in a recent New York decision. If you were harmed due to suspected negligence in a hospital setting, a knowledgeable Syracuse medical malpractice attorney can help evaluate your potential claims.

Facts of the Case and Procedural Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff was transported to the emergency department of a hospital operated by the defendant after sustaining a forearm laceration in a workplace accident on November 2, 2016. At the hospital, the injured plaintiff received an X-ray, wound cleaning, sutures, and dressing. He was discharged the same day with instructions to return for a follow-up appointment within two days.

It is alleged that the injured plaintiff did not return to the hospital for his scheduled follow-up visit but instead consulted with unaffiliated physicians. The plaintiff ultimately underwent surgery to repair several damaged tendons in his forearm. He and his spouse subsequently filed a lawsuit alleging that the hospital failed to properly diagnose and treat his injuries during the emergency department visit. The plaintiffs contended that the failure to detect and promptly repair the tendon damage constituted a deviation from accepted medical practice. The defendant hospital moved for summary judgment, seeking dismissal of the complaint on the grounds that its care was appropriate and did not cause the plaintiff’s injuries. The trial court denied the motion in part, allowing the medical malpractice claim to proceed. The hospital appealed. Continue Reading ›

In medical malpractice litigation, establishing whether a physician followed accepted standards of care is often a matter of expert testimony. When experts disagree, courts are generally reluctant to resolve the case before trial. A recent decision from a New York court highlights how disputes over a physician’s diagnostic and treatment choices must often be left to a jury. If you believe you were harmed by substandard medical care, a knowledgeable Syracuse medical malpractice attorney can help you assess your legal options.

Background of the Case

It is alleged that the injured party was admitted to a hospital in July 2016 and was diagnosed with Fournier’s gangrene, a rare but aggressive and potentially fatal bacterial infection. The injured party, along with his spouse suing derivatively, later filed a medical malpractice action against the treating internist and others. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendant failed to properly recognize, diagnose, and treat the initial symptoms of infection during the patient’s earlier medical visits, which allegedly allowed the infection to progress into a life-threatening condition.

It is reported that the defendant treated the injured party on July 7, 2016, three days before the diagnosis was formally made. According to the plaintiffs, the defendant did not appropriately assess or respond to signs that should have alerted him to the developing infection. The plaintiffs contended that had the infection been identified earlier, it could have been treated before advancing into a more dangerous and systemic illness. Continue Reading ›

In medical malpractice litigation, timing can be everything, especially when a diagnosis is allegedly delayed. When a physician fails to order appropriate testing or pursue a differential diagnosis, it can have irreversible consequences for the patient. A recent New York decision highlights how disputes over whether a delay in diagnosis impacted a patient’s prognosis can preclude dismissal of a case before trial. If you or someone you love has been harmed due to delayed medical care, a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney can help evaluate your potential claims.

Factual Background and Procedural Setting

It is alleged that the decedent was under the care of a urologist between August 2017 and August 2018 after experiencing urinary symptoms, including burning during urination and nocturia. The plaintiff, acting as administrator of the decedent’s estate, filed a medical malpractice and wrongful death action against the physician and related medical entities. The plaintiff asserted that the defendant failed to timely diagnose the decedent’s prostate cancer, which was ultimately discovered in August 2018 at stage IV with bone metastases.

It is reported that the decedent initially presented with urinary complaints in August 2017, at which time the defendant performed a physical examination and offered a PSA test, which the defendant claimed the decedent declined. Follow-up visits included treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia, and in February 2018, the defendant performed a transurethral vaporization of the prostate. No tumors were observed during this procedure, but the plaintiff alleged that a different procedure, transurethral resection of the prostate, would have allowed for tissue biopsy and led to an earlier diagnosis. Continue Reading ›

In high-stakes medical malpractice litigation, timing can be just as critical as the substance of the claims. Courts enforce strict deadlines for dispositive motions like summary judgment, which can derail a party’s case. However, a recent New York decision suggests that courts will consider granting leeway when confusion arises from court-generated discrepancies. If you are contemplating pursuing a medical malpractice claim, it is wise to consult a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney for guidance.

Background of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff initiated a medical malpractice action against multiple defendants, including individual medical providers and healthcare institutions, arising from care provided at a hospital and diagnostic center. Reportedly, after years of litigation and discovery, the plaintiff filed a Note of Issue in October 2024, signaling that the case was trial-ready.

It is reported that the defendants, including a physician and a hospital, filed motions for summary judgment on December 31, 2024, seeking to dismiss the claims. However, these motions were filed 90 days after the Note of Issue, exceeding the standard 60-day deadline set by the trial court’s rules. The plaintiff objected, arguing that the motions were untimely and should be rejected. Continue Reading ›

In the chaos of medical procedures and postoperative care, patients trust healthcare providers not only to treat them effectively but also to safeguard them from harm. Yet when an injury occurs—such as a fall while under medical supervision—the question of whether it constitutes simple negligence or rises to the level of medical malpractice becomes critical. A recent New York court decision highlights how this distinction can determine whether a patient’s case survives or is dismissed on procedural grounds. If you were injured while under hospital care and are unsure how to proceed, a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney can help you navigate this complex legal terrain.

Factual and Procedural History

It is alleged that the plaintiff was receiving anesthetic treatment at the defendant hospital when she was later assisted to the bathroom by hospital staff. While under the lingering effects of the anesthesia, the plaintiff fell, allegedly due to the negligence of the nurse and aide assisting her.

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a notice of claim in a timely manner, as required when asserting tort claims against a municipal entity, such as the defendant hospital. The notice of claim specifically alleged ordinary negligence, focusing on the staff’s failure to safely assist the plaintiff to the bathroom. Continue Reading ›

Medical facilities have a duty to take appropriate precautions to prevent their patients from suffering foreseeable harm. For example, in cases involving fall risks, hospitals and medical staff must ensure they have implemented adequate safety measures to protect patients, and if they neglect to do so, it may lead to significant injuries. Demonstrating liability following a fall can be challenging, though, as demonstrated in a recent New York case that discussed the legal complexities surrounding fall risk assessments and the role of expert testimony in establishing fault. If you believe inadequate medical care led to your injuries, you should speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer regarding your rights.

Factual Background and Procedural Setting  

It is alleged that the plaintiff visited the emergency department of the defendant hospital, where he was identified as a fall risk and provided with a wristband to indicate his status. Reportedly, while waiting in a wheelchair for admission, the plaintiff attempted to stand after his name was called and fell, sustaining injuries. The plaintiff asserted that the hospital staff failed to take appropriate safety measures, which contributed to his injuries.

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against multiple defendants, including the hospital, nurses, and patient care assistants, alleging medical malpractice. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that they had adhered to the appropriate standard of care and that no negligent actions on their part caused the plaintiff’s fall. The trial court granted the defendants’ motion, dismissing the claims against them. The plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Many medical malpractice cases hinge on the strength of expert testimony, particularly when complex medical conditions are involved. Plaintiffs must not only demonstrate a deviation from the standard of care but also establish that the negligence directly caused harm. This was emphasized in a recent New York medical malpractice case in which the plaintiff sought to demonstrate the liability of a nursing home. If you suspect that a loved one has suffered due to substandard nursing home care, it is advisable to talk to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney about your options.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the decedent, a 94-year-old woman with a history of significant medical conditions, was admitted to the defendant nursing home for rehabilitation following a femur fracture and small bowel obstruction. Reportedly, upon admission, she had stage II pressure ulcers, which were treated in accordance with standard wound care protocols. However, it is alleged that despite ongoing care, her condition worsened, and she ultimately developed a stage IV sacral decubitus ulcer, which became infected with osteomyelitis.

It is reported that the decedent was transferred to a hospital for additional treatment, including a blood transfusion and further wound care, but her overall health continued to deteriorate. She ultimately passed away, with her death certificate citing respiratory failure due to the large sacral ulcer as a contributing factor. The plaintiff, the administrator of the decedent’s estate, filed a lawsuit against the nursing home and its associated staff, asserting claims of medical malpractice and wrongful death. The trial court granted the nursing home’s motion for summary judgment, finding that the plaintiff had failed to establish a triable issue of fact. The plaintiff subsequently appealed. Continue Reading ›