Published on:

In many instances, parties that suffer harm due to medical negligence will sustain other damages as well, such as losses caused by violations of their civil rights. Thus, they will often choose to pursue claims for damages in federal court. While federal courts can exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims in certain circumstances, if the basis for such jurisdiction is removed, the courts will typically decline to exercise jurisdiction over such claims. This was demonstrated in a ruling recently issued in a New York case in a matter arising out of physical therapy malpractice. If you sustained injuries due to the negligence of a physical therapist, it is smart to speak to a skillful Syracuse physical therapy malpractice lawyer regarding your potential claims.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the plaintiff, who is a paraplegic, underwent a physical therapy session with the defendant. During the session, the defendant placed a hot pack on the plaintiff’s lower back and advised him to leave it there. The plaintiff subsequently suffered second-degree burns, which he alleged caused emotional trauma and mental distress in addition to physical pain. He filed a lawsuit against the defendant, asserting medical malpractice claims as well as claims arising under federal law. The defendant moved to have the plaintiff’s claims dismissed in their entirety. The court ultimately ruled in favor of the defendant and dismissed the plaintiff’s claims.

Supplemental Jurisdiction Over State Law Claims Filed in Federal Court

The court concluded that the plaintiff failed to assert viable federal claims. Thus, it dismissed the counts in his complaint that arose under federal law. The court also declined to exercise jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s medical malpractice claim, which arose under state law, unless the plaintiff was able to amend his complaint to assert a viable federal claim. Continue reading

Published on:

Typically, medical malpractice cases arising out of incompetent medical care rendered in New York are filed in state court. Plaintiffs are not precluded from pursuing claims in federal court, but if they do so they must establish that jurisdiction is proper; otherwise, their claims may be dismissed. Recently, a New York court discussed federal diversity jurisdiction over medical malpractice cases in a matter in which the plaintiff asserted numerous claims against multiple defendants. If you suffered harm because of incompetent medical care, it is critical to retain a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to assist you in pursuing any compensation you may be owed.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a federal lawsuit asserting numerous claims against multiple parties, including a medical malpractice claim against the defendant hospital. Specifically, the plaintiff alleged the defendant hospital unjustly discharged him and unlawfully shared his confidential health records with third parties. The defendant hospital moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s medical malpractice claims on the grounds that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over them. After reviewing the pleadings, the court agreed and dismissed the plaintiff’s medical malpractice claims without prejudice.

Federal Diversity Jurisdiction in Medical Malpractice Cases

Pursuant to federal law, district courts have jurisdiction over civil claims if the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, and the dispute is between citizens of different states. The courts strictly construe the law against finding jurisdiction. Further, the law requires that, in federal actions in which jurisdiction is premised on diversity, complete diversity of citizenship must exist when the plaintiff institutes the action. Continue reading

Published on:

In New York, it is not uncommon for a person to receive medical care in a facility owned by a municipality. Doctors that work for municipalities, like other physicians, can make harmful mistakes, and while parties can seek compensation from municipalities via medical malpractice suits, they must comply with certain notice requirements to protect their claims. Recently, a New York court issued an opinion warning of the consequences of failing to comply with notice requirements in cases against municipalities, in a matter in which it ultimately dismissed the plaintiff’s claims. If you were hurt by incompetent medical care in a municipal facility, it is smart to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer regarding what you must do to protect your rights.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the plaintiff entered a municipally owned facility, and during her admission process, advised the defendant nurse that she was prescribed numerous medications that she must continue to take to maintain her health. She was administered some, but not all, of her medications. She later met with the defendant psychiatrist and advised she felt a manic episode coming on.

Allegedly, she was not provided the psychiatric medication she needed to manage her symptoms regardless of her requests. She subsequently filed a lawsuit against the defendants and other parties, asserting numerous claims. The defendants moved for dismissal, while the plaintiff moved for permission to amend her complaint to add medical malpractice claims against the defendants. The defendants opposed the plaintiff’s motion. Continue reading

Published on:

In New York, medical malpractice cases differ from other civil claims in multiple ways. For example, there are numerous additional pleading and evidentiary requirements imposed on plaintiffs that they must meet in order to pursue damages. If plaintiffs fail to abide by the statutory obligations, it may adversely affect their claims. For example, in a recent New York nursing malpractice case, the court discussed the implications of the failure to include a certificate of merit with an initial pleading. If you suffered harm due to the negligence of a nurse, it is prudent to consult a Syracuse nursing malpractice lawyer to discuss what evidence you must produce to recover damages.

The Plaintiff’s Claims

It is reported that the plaintiff’s decedent presented to the county courthouse in response to a warrant. As part of a routine screening, the decedent reported that he had consumed numerous illicit and prescription drugs prior to arriving at the courthouse, and during his hearing, a drug treatment coordinator advised she was concerned for his safety and he needed immediate medical care. Regardless, the judge ordered him to confinement in the county jail.

Allegedly, the defendant nurses were both working at the county jail that day and observed the decedent, who was having difficulty standing, speaking, and walking. At one point, the plaintiff spoke with one of the nurses and stated she was concerned the decedent would die if he did not receive prompt care, and the defendant nurse stated the decedent was fine. The decedent passed away to form an accidental drug overdose, and the plaintiff filed numerous claims, including medical malpractice claims against the defendants. The defendants moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims, arguing she failed to comply with the required procedure. Continue reading

Published on:

In New York, whether a medical malpractice case is successful typically hinges on whether the judge or jury finds either party’s expert reports to be adequate or compelling. As such, both plaintiffs and defendants will often argue the opposing party’s expert reports are deficient, or that their expert lacks the qualifications needed to offer an opinion. Recently, a New York court discussed the sufficiency of expert reports in a case in which the plaintiff alleged he suffered harm due to hospital malpractice. If you were hurt by incompetent care in a hospital, you should meet with a Syracuse hospital malpractice lawyer to determine your options for seeking damages.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations

It is reported that the plaintiff was admitted to the defendant hospital multiple times between April and July 2008. During his admissions, he developed lesions and decubitus ulcers on his legs, knees, and other areas of his body, which he asserted were caused by the negligence of the defendant’s employees. Thus, he filed a lawsuit against the defendant, seeking compensation for his harm which he asserted was caused by medical malpractice.

Allegedly, after the parties exchanged expert reports, the defendant moved for summary judgment. The plaintiff opposed the motion on the grounds that the defendant’s expert lacked the qualifications to offer an expert opinion, but the court granted it, dismissing the plaintiff’s claims. The plaintiff then appealed. Continue reading

Published on:

Generally, plaintiffs in medical malpractice cases allege that the defendant doctors failed to provide them with proper care, thereby causing their harm. In some instances, though, the plaintiff will not allege the defendant negligently caused the plaintiff to suffer physical injuries but will instead seek to hold the defendant accountable for medical malpractice for failing to prevent the plaintiff from harming others. This was demonstrated in a recent case in which the plaintiff argued his treating psychiatrists committed medical malpractice by failing to recognize he posed a risk of injury to other individuals.  If you suffered losses due to a negligent psychiatrist, it is prudent to confer with an experienced Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer about your rights.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations

It is reported that the plaintiff was arrested and taken to the defendant hospital after he threatened to kill his family and abused and killed an animal. When he was at the hospital, he was examined by the defendant psychiatrist, who failed to diagnose him with any mental disease or ongoing condition and discharged him without notifying the police.

Allegedly, after he was discharged, the defendant killed the three members of his family he previously threatened. He subsequently was arrested and charged with numerous crimes. The State accepted his plea that he was not guilty by reason of insanity, and he was placed in an institution. He then filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant. The defendant moved for dismissal, arguing that the plaintiff failed to set forth a legally cognizable claim. The court denied the motion, and the defendant appealed. Continue reading

Published on:

Back conditions are complicated, and doctors require extensive training and experience before they can properly manage them. If a doctor fails to address symptoms that indicate potentially critical back issues, it can result in significant damages, including paralysis. Even if it seems clear that a patient’s losses are caused by negligence, however, to recover damages in a medical malpractice case, a plaintiff must typically retain a medical expert who sets forth precisely how the defendant doctor harmed the plaintiff. The failure to do so can result in the dismissal of the case, as demonstrated in a recent New York ruling. If you were injured by an incompetent orthopedic surgeon, it is smart to meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to determine your options.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the plaintiff suffered from scoliosis and underwent numerous spinal surgeries throughout her life. She routinely treated with the defendant orthopedic surgeon for management of her back pain. In October 2016, her back pain worsened, and she underwent x-rays which revealed that one of the rods that had previously been surgically installed in her back had broken. She visited the defendant, who determined that her condition was not emergent and did not require any management at that time because she was neurologically stable.

Published on:

Medical malpractice cases often settle or are dismissed prior to reaching the trial stage. If they are not, though, a jury will be tasked with determining issues such as the defendant’s liability and the plaintiff’s damages. Juries are expected to issue verdicts that align with the evidence presented by the parties, but if they do not, parties can ask the court to set aside the verdict. In a recent New York opinion issued in a medical malpractice case against a family doctor, the court discussed what a party who wishes to vacate a jury’s verdict must establish. If you were harmed by a careless physician, it is in your best interest to meet with a trusted Syracuse family doctor malpractice lawyer to discuss your options.

The Plaintiff’s Claims

It is reported that the plaintiff visited the defendant family care doctor with complaints of pain in his left ear. The defendant examined the plaintiff and observed he had impacted cerumen in his ear and prescribed him antibiotics. He returned a week later with similar symptoms. The defendant’s medical assistant attempted to irrigate the plaintiff’s ear to remove the cerumen but was unable to clear the blockage. Thus, the defendant performed irrigation on the ear.

Allegedly, at a follow-up visit three days later, the defendant advised the plaintiff that the tympanic membrane in his left ear had been perforated, and he would need to undergo surgery to correct the injury. The plaintiff commenced a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant, alleging the defendant failed to obtain his informed consent prior to performing the irrigation. A jury ultimately issued a verdict in favor of the defendant, and the plaintiff filed a motion to set aside the verdict. Continue reading

Published on:

The birth of a child is a joyous event, but sometimes it can be marred by injuries that arise due to medical negligence. While parties can seek compensation for harm suffered during birth, they must abide by any applicable procedural rules, and if they do not, they may waive the right to recover damages. This was discussed in a recent New York opinion, in which an appellate court affirmed a trial court order granting a plaintiff leave to provide late notice of a birth injury claim. If your child suffered harm at birth, it is advisable to speak to a skilled  Syracuse birth injury lawyer as soon as possible.

The Plaintiff’s Claims

It is alleged that the plaintiff delivered her son at the defendant hospital in June 2015. The child suffered a brain injury during the delivery, which the plaintiff alleged was caused by medical negligence. Thus, in May 2018, she filed a medical malpractice case against the defendant. The defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint on the grounds that the plaintiff neglected to serve a timely notice of the claim. The court denied the motion, and the defendant then filed an appeal.

Notice Required in Medical Malpractice Actions Against Public Corporations

New York law requires that a plaintiff who wishes to pursue claims against a public corporation must provide the corporation with notice of the claim within 90 days of when it arises. The notice is a prerequisite to filing a tort action. The courts may extend the time to serve notice if they deem it appropriate. The court will consider factors such as whether the corporation or its insurers had actual notice of the claim, whether the claimant was an infant, whether the delay was reasonable and whether any prejudice was caused by the delay. Continue reading

Published on:

In most medical malpractice cases, both parties will retain medical experts to testify on issues like the applicable standard of care and causation. While experts typically practice in the same field as the parties named as defendants, they do not have to work in the same specialty to be qualified to offer testimony. This was explained in a recent New  York opinion issued in a case arising out of the defendant’s mismanagement of a patient’s diabetes, which ultimately resulted in his death. If you lost a loved one due to the negligence of a primary care physician, you should speak to a Syracuse primary care malpractice attorney regarding your right to pursue damages.

The Decedent’s Harm

It is reported that the decedent was transferred from a hospital to the defendant rehabilitation facility. During his admission at the facility, he was cared for by the defendant physician. The decedent, who suffered from type II diabetes, soon began to experience significant symptoms due to his illness. The defendant physician failed to properly manage the decedent’s diabetes, however, and the decedent’s condition worsened.

Allegedly, the decedent ultimately died due to complications caused by his diabetes. The plaintiff, the decedent’s son, filed a medical malpractice case against the defendants, alleging their negligent treatment of the decedent caused his death. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing the plaintiff’s expert was not qualified to testify regarding the defendant physician’s management of the decedent’s diabetes. The trial court agreed and granted the motion. The plaintiff then appealed. Continue reading

Justia Lawyer Rating
Contact Information