Syracuse Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
Medical malpractice litigation is often a marathon rather than a sprint, but even lengthy proceedings must adhere to procedural timelines. A recent decision from a New York court demonstrates the importance of prosecuting a case diligently and in accordance with court-imposed deadlines. In this medical malpractice action, the plaintiff failed to meet the statutory and procedural. If you have questions about how the law applies to your potential claim, it is advisable to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.
Factual and Procedural Background
It is reported that the plaintiff, acting individually and as executor of his spouse’s estate, filed suit in 2013 following her death from lung cancer. The complaint asserted claims for medical malpractice, alleging that the defendants’ negligent treatment contributed to or caused her death. More than eight years later, in May 2021, the Supreme Court issued an order directing the plaintiff to file a note of issue by June 14, 2021.
It is alleged that the plaintiff did not comply with that directive and failed to file the note of issue by the specified date. In June 2022, the defendants each served 90-day notices pursuant to CPLR 3216, formally demanding that the plaintiff file the note of issue within 90 days or face dismissal for failure to prosecute. The plaintiff again did not meet the required deadline, and in May and June 2023, the defendants separately moved to dismiss the complaint against them based on the plaintiff’s inaction.
It is further reported that the plaintiff opposed the motions, contending that law office failure on the part of his counsel justified the delay. He also argued that the case was potentially meritorious. Nonetheless, the trial court denied the motions to dismiss, prompting the defendants to appeal.
Diligence in Pursuing Medical Malpractice Claims
On appeal, the court reversed the trial court’s order and dismissed the action. The court emphasized the strict procedural requirements of CPLR 3216. Once a plaintiff has received a 90-day notice, he or she must either file the note of issue or move to vacate or extend the demand before the deadline. Here, the plaintiff did neither.
The court further explained that even after defaulting, a plaintiff may avoid dismissal by demonstrating both a justifiable excuse for the failure and a potentially meritorious cause of action. The plaintiff in this case asserted law office failure, which courts may accept under CPLR 2005. However, such a claim must be supported by a detailed and credible explanation of the circumstances. The plaintiff’s explanation was found to be vague and conclusory and therefore insufficient as a justification for the missed deadline.
Additionally, the court found that the plaintiff failed to provide any evidentiary support for the malpractice allegations. Specifically, no medical expert affirmation or competent evidence was submitted to substantiate the claim that the decedent’s death resulted from medical negligence. As a result, the plaintiff did not meet the second requirement of establishing a potentially meritorious claim.
Given the plaintiff’s failure to comply with the court’s directives, his lack of a compelling excuse, and the absence of proof supporting his malpractice allegations, the court concluded that the trial court had improvidently exercised its discretion. The complaint was dismissed as to all defendants.
Talk to a Trusted Syracuse Medical Malpractice Attorney
Timely and diligent prosecution of a lawsuit is critical to preserving your legal claims, especially in complex medical malpractice matters. If you are considering filing a medical malpractice claim or are unsure about where your case stands procedurally, the trusted Syracuse medical malpractice attorneys at DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers can help guide you through every stage. Contact us at 833-200-2000 or reach out online to schedule a free and confidential consultation.
