Published on:

New York Court Reverses Order Denying Summary Judgment in a Cardiology Malpractice Case

Tragically, many people suffer devastating complications following routine surgical procedures. In some instances, the complications are the result of medical malpractice and could have been avoided by the exercise of due care, but in others, they are merely unfortunate and unexpected side effects. Recently, a New York court discussed the burden of proof imposed on a plaintiff in an opinion delivered in a cardiology malpractice case where the plaintiff’s decedent died following a routine eye procedure. If you suffered harm due to a careless cardiologist, you might be owed damages, and it would benefit you to meet with a trusted Syracuse cardiology malpractice attorney to discuss your options.

The Plaintiff’s Losses and Claims

It is reported that the plaintiff’s decedent underwent eye surgery, which was performed at the defendant outpatient facility. Prior to the procedure, he underwent a physical examination with the defendant primary care physician. Sadly, the decedent suffered unexpected complications and died shortly after the procedure. The plaintiff then commenced a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant facility and primary care physician, as well as the decedent’s cardiologist. The defendants moved to have the claims against them dismissed via summary judgment, but the court denied their motions. They then appealed.

Establishing Liability in a Medical Malpractice Case

On appeal, the court reversed the trial court rulings. The court noted that to prove the liability of a doctor, a plaintiff must prove that the doctor departed from the accepted standard of practice and that the departure directly caused the plaintiff’s losses. A defendant that wishes to have medical malpractice claims dismissed via summary judgment must produce prima facie evidence that he or she did not depart from the accepted practice of medicine or that the departure did not proximately lead to the plaintiff’s harm.

If the defendant meets its burden, the plaintiff must produce evidence sufficient to show a disputed issue of fact exists that requires a trial. In the subject case, the appellate court found that, contrary to the plaintiff’s assertions, the defendants demonstrated their right to judgment in their favor as a matter of law. Specifically, they produced evidence sufficient to prove that they did not depart from the standard of care, and to the extent that they did, any departure did not lead to the plaintiff’s harm. In response, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Thus, the appellate court found that the trial court erred in denying the defendants’ motions and reversed the trial court order.

Meet with a Skillful Syracuse Attorney

Some people who expect to undergo routine procedures without issue suddenly suffer devastating losses, and in many cases, they are able to recover damages in a medical malpractice lawsuit. If you suffered losses due to cardiology malpractice, it is prudent to meet with an attorney to determine what damages you may be able to pursue in a lawsuit. At DeFrancisco & Falgiatano, LLP Personal Injury Lawyers, our skillful medical malpractice attorneys take pride in assertively advocating on behalf of our clients, and if you hire us, we will work tirelessly to help you seek a just outcome. You can reach us through our online form or at 315-479-9000 to set up a meeting.

Justia Lawyer Rating
Contact Information