Syracuse Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Published on: November 29, 2022

Court Examines the Relation Back Doctrine in New York Medical Malpractice Cases

Pursuant to New York law, parties pursuing wrongful death claims against negligent healthcare providers must comply with the applicable statute of limitations. Generally, the courts will dismiss claims filed outside of the statutory period. There are exceptions, though, that allow for the tolling of the statute of limitations, such as when a claim relates back to a previously filed pleading. In a recent opinion issued in a wrongful death and medical malpractice case, a New York court analyzed whether the relation back doctrine applies to consolidated cases, ultimately concluding that it does. If you lost a loved one due to medical malpractice, it is in your best interest to consult a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to discuss your potential claims.

The Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that the decedent died in October 2017. In May 2019, the plaintiffs filed a wrongful death and medical malpractice lawsuit against multiple defendants, arguing that their failure to properly interpret the decedent’s imaging studies led to his death. In January 2020, the plaintiffs filed a second medical malpractice and wrongful death case, naming a doctor that was not properly served in the first case and her company as defendants.

Allegedly, the two cases were then consolidated. The defendants in the second action then moved for dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims on the grounds that they were filed outside of the statute of limitations. The plaintiffs opposed the motion, arguing that the relation back doctrine applied and, therefore, the claims were not barred by the statute of limitations. Continue reading

Published on: November 23, 2022

New York Court Discusses Grounds for Granting a Motion for Change of Venue in a Medical Malpractice Case

by DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Generally, a plaintiff in a medical malpractice lawsuit has the right to designate the venue for the case in the initial pleading. The right is not boundless, however, and there are several grounds upon which a defendant can seek a change of venue. Recently, in an opinion delivered by a New York court in a matter arising out of medical malpractice, the court explained the basis for granting a motion for a change of venue. If you suffered harm because of inadequate medical care, it is smart to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer about your rights.

The History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff sought treatment from the defendant optometrist for a detached retina in the left eye. The defendant performed an attachment procedure but according to the plaintiff, failed to do so properly. The procedure occurred in the Bronx, at the office of the defendant practice.

It is reported that the plaintiff subsequently filed a medical malpractice claim against the defendants in Bronx County. The defendant practice was dismissed from the case. The defendant optometrist then moved to transfer venue to New York County. Continue reading

Published on: November 14, 2022

New York Court Declines to Exercise Federal Jurisdiction Over Medical Malpractice Claims

by DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

While it is prudent for people who want to pursue civil claims to seek the assistance of an attorney in most instances, medical malpractice cases are especially complex, and the decision to proceed pro se often negatively impacts a plaintiff’s rights. The ramifications of pursuing medical malpractice claims without an attorney were demonstrated in a recent New York matter in which the court dismissed the plaintiff’s claims. If you were hurt by the negligence of a physician, it is in your best interest to retain a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to assist you in protecting your interests.

Procedural History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff was admitted to the defendant hospital and discharged later the same day. He did not indicate the nature of his concerns in his complaint. Four days later, he suffered a medical incident and was taken to the defendant medical center, where he was again discharged the same day. He subsequently fell after his discharge and was readmitted. During his second admission to the medical center, he had a pacemaker implanted. He then filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendants in federal court, seeking $50,000 in compensation. He was not represented by an attorney and requested to proceed in forma pauperis.

Federal Jurisdiction Over Medical Malpractice Claims

While the court granted the plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, it dismissed the plaintiff’s claims without prejudice due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court explained that if it determines at any juncture that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over a matter, it must dismiss the action. Continue reading

Published on: November 7, 2022

New York Court Grants Summary Judgment in Plaintiff’s Favor in a Car Accident Case

by DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Although the majority of car accidents are caused by careless driving, people who negligently cause collisions rarely admit liability. Instead, in most instances, they will argue that there are factual disputes that must be resolved by a jury. In some cases, though, the evidence will be so compelling that the courts will deem a defendant liable as a matter of law, as demonstrated in a recent opinion issued in a New York case arising out of a rear-end collision. If you were hurt in a car crash, you have the right to seek compensation, and it is wise to talk to a Syracuse personal injury attorney as soon as possible.

Factual and Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff husband was driving a vehicle in which the plaintiff wife was riding as a passenger when they were struck from behind by a car driven by the defendant. The plaintiffs subsequently filed a personal injury lawsuit in which they asserted negligence claims against the defendant.

Allegedly, the defendant filed an answer in which he set forth the affirmative defense of comparative negligence. The plaintiffs then moved for dismissal of the affirmative defense and summary judgment in their favor on the issue of liability. The trial court denied their motion, and they appealed. Continue reading

Published on: October 27, 2022

New York Court Explains Grounds for Granting Summary Judgment in a Bike Accident Case

by DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Bicycle accidents can cause catastrophic harm, and in most instances, they can are brought about by negligence. As such, people hurt in such crashes will often seek compensation from the person they deem responsible. While liability is obvious in some bike accident cases, in others, the issue of fault must be determined by a jury. This was illustrated in a recent New York ruling delivered in a bicycle accident case in which the court denied the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability. If you suffered harm in a bike accident, it is in your best interest to meet with a Syracuse personal injury attorney to determine your potential claims.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff sustained injuries in a bike accident when he collided with the open door of the defendant’s van. He subsequently filed a personal injury lawsuit against the defendant, alleging he negligently caused the crash. The accounts of how the accident occurred differed. The plaintiff asserted that he was riding at a speed of five to seven miles per hour and that the defendant swung his door open seconds before the plaintiff struck it.

It is reported that the defendant stated that he checked the lane behind him and saw nothing for 200 feet and opened his door, and five seconds later, the plaintiff hit it. The plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability and for dismissal of the defendant’s affirmative defense of contributory negligence. The trial court granted the motion, and the defendant appealed. Continue reading

Published on: October 21, 2022

New York Court Discusses the Statute of Limitations in Claims Against Medical Providers

by DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

New York law sets forth statutes of limitations for pursuing civil claims. While medical malpractice claims fall under the umbrella of civil claims, they have a shorter statute of limitations. Thus, which limitation applies depends on whether the person that allegedly caused the plaintiff harm committed ordinary negligence or negligence in the context of medical treatment. Recently, a New York court discussed how to determine which limitations period applies in a matter in which the defendant pursued claims against a social worker and psychologist. If you were hurt by the carelessness of a physician, it is smart to talk to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney about your right to pursue damages.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the plaintiff’s son was diagnosed with schizoaffective disorders and bipolar disorder in 2014. While he periodically suffered psychotic episodes during which he acted violently and destructively and hallucinated, his condition was stabilized with medication and psychiatric care. Following a psychotic episode, he was confined to a state institution. While he was designated as having the most serious category of mental health illnesses, he was not medicated, and his condition declined.

Allegedly, he suffered multiple psychotic episodes during his confinement. He experienced delays in receiving a mental health evaluation or medication and ultimately stabbed the plaintiff. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendants, the parties responsible for her son’s confinement and care during his confinement. Among other things, she alleged that the parties responsible for his psychiatric care negligently performed their services. The defendants moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s medical malpractice claims as time-barred. Continue reading

Published on: October 13, 2022

Court Explains Evidence Needed to Establish Negligence in a New York Medical Malpractice Case

by DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

It is not uncommon for surgical procedures to be less successful than anticipated. While in some instances, such results are unavoidable, in others, they are the result of negligence. As such, a party that suffers injuries following a procedure typically must produce expert testimony to show that their harm was the result of medical negligence and was not merely an unavoidable outcome. Recently, a New York ruling issued in a medical malpractice case highlighted the importance of expert testimony, as the failure to provide an adequate expert opinion resulted in the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claim. If you suffered injuries due to medical incompetence, you should meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to determine what claims you may be able to pursue.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff underwent a bypass of the femoral popliteal artery in his right leg. The surgery was performed by the defendant doctor and defendant physician’s assistant at the defendant hospital. The surgery ultimately proved unsuccessful. The plaintiff later underwent two additional bypass surgeries, which were unsuccessful, before his right leg was amputated below the knee.

Reportedly, the plaintiff subsequently filed a medical malpractice action against the defendants asserting, among other things, that the defendant doctor’s negligence in performing the initial surgery led to the amputation of his leg. After discovery was complete, the defendants moved for dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims via summary judgment. The plaintiff filed a response in opposition to the motion, but the court granted it. The plaintiff appealed. Continue reading

Published on: October 6, 2022

New York Court Discusses Establishing Liability in a Medical Malpractice Case

by DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

In the majority of medical malpractice cases, the plaintiff must offer evidence in the form of an expert opinion to show that the defendant caused their harm. There are some exceptions, though, like when the doctrine of res ipsa loquitor applies. If a plaintiff fails to assert this argument, however, the lack of expert evidence will most likely be fatal to their claim, as shown in a recent ruling issued in a New York medical malpractice case in which the plaintiff asserted he suffered an eye injury during knee surgery. If you were injured by a carelessly performed procedure, it is smart to talk to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer about what evidence you need to offer to recover damages.

Procedural History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff underwent arthroscopic surgery on his knee to repair a torn meniscus. The defendant performed the procedure. Shortly after the surgery, the plaintiff began to experience redness and pain in his left eye. He was subsequently diagnosed with a corneal abrasion. He then instituted a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant and the hospital where the defendant worked, alleging that the defendant negligently performed the surgery, causing injuries to his knee and eye. The defendant moved for summary judgment on the cause of action relating to the eye injury. The trial court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appealed.

Published on: September 28, 2022

New York Court Examines Liability for Failing to Yield the Right of Way

by DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

All New York motorists have an obligation to abide by vehicle and traffic laws. Among other things, this includes the duty to yield to other motorists who have the right of way. If a driver fails to abide by a traffic law and subsequently causes a collision, they may be deemed negligent as a matter of law, as shown in a recent opinion issued in a New York car accident case. If you were hurt in a collision, it is wise to talk to a Syracuse personal injury lawyer about your possible causes of action.

Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff was driving his motorcycle on a New York road when he approached an intersection. He observed that the traffic light he was approaching was green, and he did not see any cars in front of him. After he entered the intersection, he noticed the defendant driver begin to make a left-hand turn in front of him. Due to the abruptness of the turn, he did not have time to stop or divert his motorcycle to avoid colliding with the defendant.

Reportedly, the plaintiff filed a personal injury lawsuit against the defendant, seeking compensation for the injuries he sustained in the accident. Before depositions were taken or discovery was complete, the plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment asking the court to rule in his favor on the issue of liability and seeking a dismissal of the defendant’s affirmative defense of comparative negligence. In support of his motion, he provided the police accident report and his affidavit. The trial court denied his motion, and he appealed. Continue reading

Published on: September 21, 2022

Court Discusses Establishing a Podiatrist’s Liability for Medical Malpractice Under New York Law

by DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Under New York law, podiatrists, like all medical professionals, have an obligation to treat their patients in a manner that complies with the accepted and good practice of medicine. If they fail to negligently perform their duties, thereby causing their patients harm, they may be liable for medical malpractice. Recently, a New York court explained what a plaintiff must prove to recover damages in a medical malpractice case against a podiatrist in a matter in which the defendant caused fatal harm. If you or a loved one sustained injuries because of the carelessness of a podiatrist, you should meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to assess whether you may be owed damages.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent, who was 81 years old and suffered from numerous chronic health concerns, visited the defendant podiatrist for treatment of a burn on the top of his right foot. The defendant examined the decedent’s foot and noted that while he had areas of raw skin and blisters, there were no signs of cellulitis or infection. The defendant diagnosed the decedent with a second-degree burn, cleaned and dressed his wound, and instructed him on wound care.

Reportedly, the decedent had a follow-up visit with the defendant six and then eleven days later, during which the defendant again noted no signs of infection or cellulitis. A month and a half later, the decedent was admitted to the hospital, where he underwent an amputation of his right foot. Two months later, he died due to cardiac arrest. The plaintiff instituted medical malpractice and wrongful death claims against the defendant, who moved for summary judgment following discovery. The court denied the defendant’s motion, and she appealed. Continue reading