Syracuse Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Medical malpractice claims typically allege that a medical provider negligently breached the standard of care and therefore, the provider should be responsible for any harm the injured party sustained because of the inadequate care. To recover under a medical malpractice claim alleging negligence, in addition to proving that the medical provider’s care was negligent, you must show that the negligence was the actual cause of your damages.

This was illustrated in a recent case decided by the appellate division of the Supreme Court of New York, in which the court affirmed a jury’s verdict in favor of the defendant medical provider, despite finding he provided negligent care. If you were harmed by inadequate medical care, you should seek a consultation with a trusted Syracuse medical malpractice attorney in a timely manner to discuss what options you have for pursuing damages from the responsible parties.

Plaintiff’s Allegations and the Jury Ruling

The plaintiff sued the defendant doctor for allegedly improperly performing diagnostic arthroscopic knee surgery, without her consent. The plaintiff claimed that as a result of the surgery, which was unnecessary, she suffered neurovascular injuries. During the trial, the defendant and plaintiff each presented evidence from experts certified in orthopedic surgery and neurosurgery. The jury ultimately found that the defendant deviated from the standard of care in his pre-surgical examination of the plaintiff, but the deviation was not the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s alleged injuries. Additionally, the jury found that the defendant did not deviate from the standard of care in any other way in his treatment of the plaintiff and that the defendant obtained the plaintiff’s informed consent prior to performing the surgery. The plaintiff filed a motion to set aside the jury’s verdict, alleging that the jury’s verdict was contrary to and against the weight of the evidence. The court denied the motion, and the plaintiff appealed.

Continue reading

Under New York law, medical malpractice actions must be filed within two and a half years of the last date of treatment or they may be barred as untimely. Depending on the nature of the relationship between the patient and treatment provider, however, the last date of treatment may be up for debate.

Recently, the Supreme Court of New York held that an issue of fact existed as to whether an injured party’s treatment with a medical practice could be imputed to the surgeon that allegedly caused her harm. If you suffered injuries or illness due to insufficient medical care, it is in your best interest to consult a seasoned Syracuse medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible to determine whether you may be able to seek compensation from one or more of the medical providers that caused you harm.

Plaintiff’s Treatment

Reportedly, on March 18, 2011, the plaintiff underwent a bilateral mastectomy with a first surgeon and immediately after underwent a bilateral breast reconstruction with a second surgeon. The plaintiff subsequently contracted a MRSA infection at the surgical site, and receive treatment for the infection from the second surgeon until November 14, 2011. She also continued to receive treatment from the first surgeon at the practice that employed both surgeons until October 2012. On September 30, 2014, the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against both surgeons. The second surgeon filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing the plaintiff’s claims against her were barred by the two and a half year statute of limitations for medical malpractice actions in New York. The court denied the motion and the second surgeon appealed. On appeal, the court affirmed.

Continue reading