Ophthalmology Negligence

Published on: October 6, 2020

Court Dismisses a New York Medical Malpractice Case for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction

In New York, a plaintiff who wishes to seek damages in a civil lawsuit may file claims in either state or federal court. Generally, a plaintiff will rely on the advice of an attorney in determining where a case should be filed and what facts and claims should be alleged in the initial pleading. When plaintiffs choose to represent themselves, though, they often lack the knowledge necessary to accurately determine the proper procedure, which can result in a dismissal of their claims regardless of the strength of their evidence. This was demonstrated in a recent case alleging ophthalmology malpractice, in which the court noted the plaintiff had set forth claims that elicited great sympathy but dismissed the plaintiff’s case regardless due to lack of jurisdiction. If you sustained injuries or loss of vision due to the careless acts of an eye doctor, you should engage a diligent ophthalmology malpractice attorney to assist you in your pursuit of damages.

Facts and Procedural History

It is reported that the plaintiff was treated with the defendant eye doctor for complaints of eye pain and vision disturbances. Throughout the course of his care, the plaintiff underwent a surgical procedure and over fifteen hundred laser shots. The plaintiff ultimately suffered a complete loss of vision in one eye and a substantial loss of vision in the other eye, which he alleged was due to harm to his retinas caused by the shots. He then filed a lawsuit against the defendant in federal court without the assistance of counsel.

Allegedly, in response to an order from the court, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint. The court reviewed the amended complaint, and upon finding that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case, asked the plaintiff to show why the matter should not be dismissed. In the plaintiff’s response, he primarily restated his prior claims. Thus, the court dismissed the case.

Published on: August 28, 2020

Dismissal of Medical Malpractice Case in New York Demonstrates the Need for Expert Reports

by DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

It is the well-established law in New York that a plaintiff that wishes to recover damages through a medical malpractice case against a defendant must do more than merely allege that the defendant caused the plaintiff’s harm. Rather, in all cases except those involving blatant negligence, the plaintiff must produce an expert report that establishes the defendant’s liability. Thus, if a plaintiff fails to produce expert testimony, it will typically result in the dismissal of his or her claims, as shown in a recent ophthalmology malpractice case in New York. If you sustained injuries due to negligent care rendered by an eye doctor, it is advisable to confer with a seasoned Syracuse ophthalmology malpractice attorney to assess your possible claims for damages.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff was treated at a facility that was funded by the federal government for retinopathy and macular edema in both eyes. The doctors at the facility routinely provided the plaintiff with injections in both eyes. Following one of the injections in 2016, his left eye became swollen, and he began experiencing light sensitivity and pain. His symptoms lasted about ten days and then resolved. Following injection in 2017, however, he again experienced adverse effects. He was then diagnosed with dry eye syndrome and a disorder that caused opacities in both eyes.

Allegedly, the doctor who administered the injections then advised the plaintiff that it was possible that he had allergic reactions to the injections. The plaintiff then filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the federal government in federal court, alleging the negligence of the doctors at the facility caused him to suffer pain, obstructions to his vision, and diminished sight. The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, which the court granted due to the plaintiff’s failure to provide an expert report.

Published on: May 29, 2019

New York Court Discusses Parameters of Continuous Treatment Doctrine in Failure to Diagnose Malpractice Case

by DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Under New York law, a plaintiff who wishes to pursue a medical malpractice claim arising out of a doctor’s negligent failure to diagnose and treat the plaintiff in an appropriate time frame must file a lawsuit within two years and six months of the date of the alleged harm. While certain factors, such as the doctor’s ongoing treatment of the plaintiff will toll the statute of limitations, not all treatment constitutes continuous treatment for purposes of tolling the statute. A New York appellate court recently discussed what treatment is sufficient to toll the statutory period, in a case arising out of alleged ophthalmic malpractice. If you suffered harm due to your physician’s failure to provide you with a proper diagnosis in a timely manner you should consult a trusted Syracuse failure to diagnose malpractice attorney to discuss the circumstances surrounding your harm and what damages you may be able to recover.

Factual Background of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice action against the defendant ophthalmic practice and defendant ophthalmologist due to the failure to promptly diagnose and treat the plaintiff’s glaucoma. The alleged malpractice occurred on February 25, 2011, July 15, 2011, and December 6, 2013. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s case as time-barred. The trial court denied the defendants’ motion, and the defendants appealed.

Care Under the Continuous Treatment Doctrine

A defendant arguing that a plaintiffs’ medical malpractice lawsuit is barred by the applicable statute of limitations must set forth prima facie evidence that the time in which the plaintiff was required to commence his or her lawsuit has expired. If the defendant establishes the statutory period has passed, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to raise a material issue of fact as to whether the statute of limitations was tolled by the continuous treatment doctrine.
Continue reading

Published on: November 21, 2018

Shorter Wait Times Associated with Better Physician Reviews

by DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

If you suspect that you or someone you love has been the victim of medical negligence by an ophthalmologist, you can potentially recover financial damages for your injuries. Our trusted Syracuse ophthalmologist negligence attorneys will review your case and create a legal strategy accordingly. We know that your time is valuable, which is why we try to resolve every case in an efficient manner.

The Study

People nowadays turn to online reviews before making a decision in many aspects of their lives, and choosing a doctor is no exception. There are a number of websites that permit patients to post reviews of their doctors. In a new study released by the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio and Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center at Lubbock, researchers set out to examine how ophthalmologists are rated in online reviews and what factors led to higher ratings.

According to the data, 25 – 85 percent of doctors have an online profile on patient review website pages and 90 percent of those doctors have at least one rating. The study collected reviews about ophthalmologists, examining a total of 84,288 online reviews of 7,372 ophthalmologist profiles. Data shows that doctors who included a photo, biography and academic affiliation had higher ratings. In addition, shorter wait times and no history of malpractice also led to higher ratings.

Published on: March 8, 2018

Cataract Surgery Malpractice in Syracuse

by DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

While cataract surgery is very common, it is not risk-free. If you have experienced complications after cataract surgery, you may be entitled to compensation for your harm. At DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers, our seasoned Syracuse medical malpractice attorneys can examine the specifics of your injury and determine whether malpractice occurred. You can rest assured that we can fight to protect your rights at every step of the way.

A cataract is a clouding of the lens of the eye that adversely affects a person’s vision. Typically, cataracts affect older people. In fact, by the age of 80, more than half of all Americans have had a surgery to correct a cataract in either one eye or both eyes. While a cataract can happen in both eyes, it is not contagious.

Cataract surgery is one of the most common surgical procedures performed in the country. According to the American Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgery, approximately 3 million people in the United States receive cataract surgery annually. Cataract surgery is a procedure to remove the lens of your eye, in most cases replacing it with an artificial lens. An ophthalmologist performs cataract surgery on an outpatient basis. While the procedure has an extremely high success rate, there are always risks associated with any surgical procedure, and cataract surgery is no exception. Risks associated with cataract surgery include the following: