Syracuse Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

New York Court Explains Grounds for Setting Aside a Verdict in a Medical Malpractice Case

Published on: July 12, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

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 ›

New York Court Discusses Notice Required in Medical Malpractice Actions Against Public Corporations

Published on: July 8, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

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 ›

New York Court Discusses Expert Qualifications in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: July 5, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

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 ›

New York Court Discusses Evidence Sufficient to Defeat a Motion for Summary Judgment in a Medical Malpractice Case

Published on: June 30, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Motions for summary judgment are common in medical malpractice cases, as parties often believe the evidence in their favor is sufficient to obtain a ruling prior to trial. When one party files a motion for summary judgment, the other must demonstrate that, contrary to the moving party’s assertions, factual disputes exist in the case that require a trial. In a recent ruling issued in a radiology malpractice case, a New York court discussed what constitutes sufficient evidence to defeat a motion for summary judgment. If you were harmed due to a negligent radiologist, it is advisable to speak to a Syracuse radiology malpractice attorney about your case.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the plaintiff presented to the hospital with complaints of stomach pain. He subsequently underwent x-ray studies, which the defendant reviewed and deemed normal. The plaintiff was later diagnosed with stomach cancer. He then filed a medical malpractice claim against the defendant, alleging his failure to perform follow-up testing constituted negligence and caused the plaintiff’s harm. The parties engaged in discovery, after which the defendant filed a motion asking the court to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims via summary judgment.

Evidence Sufficient to Defeat a Motion for Summary Judgment

Pursuant to New York law, a defendant moving for summary judgment in a medical malpractice case must prove the lack of any material issue of fact with respect to at least one of the elements of a medical malpractice claim. In other words, the defendant must show either that he or she did not depart from the applicable standard of care or that any such departure did not proximately cause the plaintiff’s harm. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Vicarious Liability for Medical Malpractice

Published on: June 29, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

When people suffer harm due to incompetent care provided by a doctor in a hospital, they are often able to pursue medical malpractice claims against the doctor. Many plaintiffs will attempt to seek damages from the hospitals as well, but liability will only be imposed in certain circumstances. In a recent opinion, a New York court discussed what a plaintiff must show to establish a hospital should be held accountable for the negligence of one of its physicians in a case in which the plaintiff suffered permanent brain damage due to surgical errors. If you were injured because of negligent care you received in a hospital, it is smart to meet with a Syracuse hospital malpractice attorney to discuss your rights.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

Reportedly, the plaintiff visited the defendant hospital for heart surgery in February 2014. He experienced significant complications during the surgery and was subsequently placed on a ventilator and a machine that circulated his blood outside of his body. A few days later, his condition worsened, and as he was being transported to the operating room, the tubing to his life support systems was disconnected, and he suffered a loss of oxygen, which resulted in permanent brain damage.

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the surgeon and the defendant hospital, arguing the hospital was vicariously liable for the surgeon’s negligence. The hospital moved for summary judgment, and the court granted the motion. The plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Notice Required in Medical Malpractice Cases Against Municipal Entities

Published on: June 23, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

In New York, people harmed by medical malpractice have the right to seek compensation from the providers that caused their harm. They must abide by any applicable laws regarding notice and timeliness, though, otherwise they may waive the right to recover damages. For example, if the defendant is a municipal entity, a plaintiff must provide notice of a potential claim within 90 days of the date of harm. While in some cases, a court will grant leave to provide late notice, such permission is not always provided. Rather, as explained in a recent New York opinion, a plaintiff must show such leave is warranted. If you suffered harm because of medical malpractice, it is smart to meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney about your options.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the plaintiff suffered a hand injury, which was treated at a health clinic run by the defendant municipal corporation. He suffered complications during the healing process and subsequently had to undergo surgery. He asserted that his treatment did not meet the accepted standard of care but failed to serve the defendant with notice of the claim within 90 days as required by New York law. Approximately ten months later, he moved for leave to serve late notice of his claim. The trial court granted the plaintiff’s motion, and the defendant appealed. Upon review, the appellate court reversed the trial court ruling.

Grounds for Leave to Provide Late Notice of a Claim

On appeal, the court noted that the plaintiff did not offer any first-hand account of the incident or of any investigation that occurred thereafter. Further, he did not offer proof that any records of the incident existed, let alone evidence that the content of such records would show that the city had actual notice of his intention to file a civil lawsuit based on allegations of negligence within 90 days of the date of his harm or within a reasonable time after, as required to establish grounds for granting late notice under New York law. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Proving Liability in Birth Injury Cases

Published on: June 22, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Birth injuries can cause lifelong impairments that not only require costly care but are also emotionally devastating. Many birth injuries are caused by incompetent medical care, and parents of children who suffer harm at birth are often able to recover compensation for their child’s losses. The mere occurrence of an injury is not sufficient to impose liability, however. Instead, as demonstrated in a recent New York opinion, a plaintiff must produce competent evidence of medical negligence to establish a defendant’s fault. If your child was injured at birth, you might be able to pursue a claim for damages, and it is advisable to confer with a Syracuse birth injury lawyer to determine your rights.

The Plaintiff’s Claims

It is reported that the plaintiff, who was expecting her first child, was treated by the defendant midwife at the defendant hospital throughout her pregnancy. She ultimately gave birth to her son at another hospital. The infant was born prematurely and suffered numerous injuries. Thus, the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendants, alleging their negligence brought about her child’s harm. The defendants moved to have the plaintiff’s claims dismissed via via summary judgment, and the court granted the motion. The plaintiff then appealed.

Proving Liability in Birth Injury Cases

In New York, medical malpractice cases require proof that the defendant healthcare provider departed from the accepted standard of care and that such departure was the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s harm. As such, a defendant who moves for summary judgment must establish the lack of a departure from the accepted and good practice of medicine or show that the plaintiff was not harmed by any such departure. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Explains Federal Jurisdiction Over Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: June 21, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Medical malpractice cases are typically complex and require the retention of multiple experts, extensive discovery, analysis of complicated issues, and understanding of statutes and procedural rules. As such, while some people may be tempted to pursue such claims without the assistance of an attorney, it is generally ill-advised, as they make commit errors that could result in the dismissal of their case. This was explained in a recent New York matter in which the court dismissed the plaintiff’s medical malpractice lawsuit due to his failure to pursue his claims in the proper manner. If you sustained damages due to negligent treatment from a health care provider, it is in your best interest to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer about your options for seeking damages.

The Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff treated with the defendant doctors due to issues with his back. He ultimately underwent spinal surgery, which was performed by the defendants. He subsequently suffered unspecified complications. As such, he filed a pro se lawsuit against the defendants in federal court, asserting negligence per se and medical malpractice claims. The defendants moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) on the grounds that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case. After a review of the pleadings, the court granted the defendants’ motion.

Jurisdiction over Medical Malpractice Claims

The court explained that while the plaintiff, as a pro se litigant, was entitled to special consideration and would be held to less stringent standards than parties represented by attorneys, his claims must nonetheless be dismissed. The court noted that pursuant to Article III of the United States Constitution, federal courts may exercise limited jurisdiction. Specifically, they can wield subject matter jurisdiction over claims that present federal questions, which are those in which a colorable claim arises under the Constitution, treaties, or laws of the United States. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Verdict Slips in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: May 26, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Older people are especially vulnerable to the injuries that arise out of incompetent medical care, and in many instances, the harm they sustain is insurmountable, and they ultimately succumb to their illnesses. In such instances, the deceased person’s family members often can seek compensation from the negligent care providers via a wrongful death claim. In a recent New York ruling, a court discussed a dispute over verdict slips in a case in which it was alleged that medical negligence led to a person’s death. If you suffered the loss of a loved one due to incompetent medical care, you have the right to pursue claims, and you should speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to determine what compensation you may be able to recover.

The Facts of the Case

Allegedly, the plaintiff’s decedent was admitted to the defendant hospital. One evening during his stay, he vomited and then was noted to have blue lips and nailbeds. His oxygen saturation level dropped to 55%, and he died later that evening. The plaintiff then filed a lawsuit against the defendant, alleging medical negligence and wrongful death claims. Prior to trial, the parties submitted proposed verdict sheets. The defendant then filed a motion asking the court to reject the plaintiff’s verdict sheet to the extent it sought damages for emotional or physical harm or death, and conscious pain and suffering caused by the defendant’s violation of New York health laws. The court denied the defendant’s motion, after which the defendant filed a motion for leave to reargue the issues.

New York Court Discusses Federal Jurisdiction in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: May 20, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Plaintiffs are afforded many rights in medical malpractice claims, including to a large degree the ability to choose where the matter is filed. The right is not absolute, however, and defendants may seek a change of venue if they feel another location is appropriate or can remove cases to federal courts. Many defendants prefer to have cases heard in federal court, but there are restrictions as to what matters the courts may exercise jurisdiction over, and if a case is improperly removed, it may be remanded, as demonstrated in a recent ruling issued in a surgical malpractice case by a District Court sitting in New York. If you were injured by a carelessly performed procedure, it is prudent to meet with a Syracuse surgical malpractice lawyer about your rights.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent a surgical procedure during which the defendant surgeons implanted a filter into one of her veins. She subsequently suffered complications and filed a medical malpractice lawsuit in state court against the defendant surgeons and the defendant hospital. She also asserted claims against the manufacturer of the filter. The defendants removed the case to the federal district court. The plaintiff then filed a motion to remand the case back to state court, arguing that the federal court lacked jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s claims.

Federal Jurisdiction Over Medical Malpractice Claims

Pursuant to federal law, a defendant in a case brought in state court may remove the matter to the district court in the place the action is pending. District courts have jurisdiction over any civil matter where the amount in dispute exceeds $75,000, and the parties are citizens of different states. If a party removes an action filed in state court to federal court on the basis of diversity of citizenship, and the plaintiff challenges the district court’s jurisdiction as the basis for removal, the removing party bears the burden of providing adequate proof of its right to be heard in a federal forum. Continue Reading ›