Syracuse Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

New York Court Discusses Good Cause for Delays in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: March 22, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

In high-stakes medical malpractice litigation, timing can be just as critical as the substance of the claims. Courts enforce strict deadlines for dispositive motions like summary judgment, which can derail a party’s case. However, a recent New York decision suggests that courts will consider granting leeway when confusion arises from court-generated discrepancies. If you are contemplating pursuing a medical malpractice claim, it is wise to consult a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney for guidance.

Background of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff initiated a medical malpractice action against multiple defendants, including individual medical providers and healthcare institutions, arising from care provided at a hospital and diagnostic center. Reportedly, after years of litigation and discovery, the plaintiff filed a Note of Issue in October 2024, signaling that the case was trial-ready.

It is reported that the defendants, including a physician and a hospital, filed motions for summary judgment on December 31, 2024, seeking to dismiss the claims. However, these motions were filed 90 days after the Note of Issue, exceeding the standard 60-day deadline set by the trial court’s rules. The plaintiff objected, arguing that the motions were untimely and should be rejected. Continue Reading ›

Recent New York Case Highlights Distinction Between Negligence and Medical Malpractice

Published on: March 18, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

In the chaos of medical procedures and postoperative care, patients trust healthcare providers not only to treat them effectively but also to safeguard them from harm. Yet when an injury occurs—such as a fall while under medical supervision—the question of whether it constitutes simple negligence or rises to the level of medical malpractice becomes critical. A recent New York court decision highlights how this distinction can determine whether a patient’s case survives or is dismissed on procedural grounds. If you were injured while under hospital care and are unsure how to proceed, a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney can help you navigate this complex legal terrain.

Factual and Procedural History

It is alleged that the plaintiff was receiving anesthetic treatment at the defendant hospital when she was later assisted to the bathroom by hospital staff. While under the lingering effects of the anesthesia, the plaintiff fell, allegedly due to the negligence of the nurse and aide assisting her.

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a notice of claim in a timely manner, as required when asserting tort claims against a municipal entity, such as the defendant hospital. The notice of claim specifically alleged ordinary negligence, focusing on the staff’s failure to safely assist the plaintiff to the bathroom. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Expert Testimony Regarding Fall Risks

Published on: February 15, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Medical facilities have a duty to take appropriate precautions to prevent their patients from suffering foreseeable harm. For example, in cases involving fall risks, hospitals and medical staff must ensure they have implemented adequate safety measures to protect patients, and if they neglect to do so, it may lead to significant injuries. Demonstrating liability following a fall can be challenging, though, as demonstrated in a recent New York case that discussed the legal complexities surrounding fall risk assessments and the role of expert testimony in establishing fault. If you believe inadequate medical care led to your injuries, you should speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer regarding your rights.

Factual Background and Procedural Setting

It is alleged that the plaintiff visited the emergency department of the defendant hospital, where he was identified as a fall risk and provided with a wristband to indicate his status. Reportedly, while waiting in a wheelchair for admission, the plaintiff attempted to stand after his name was called and fell, sustaining injuries. The plaintiff asserted that the hospital staff failed to take appropriate safety measures, which contributed to his injuries.

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against multiple defendants, including the hospital, nurses, and patient care assistants, alleging medical malpractice. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that they had adhered to the appropriate standard of care and that no negligent actions on their part caused the plaintiff’s fall. The trial court granted the defendants’ motion, dismissing the claims against them. The plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Case Shows the Importance of Experts in Medical Malpractice Claims

Published on: February 5, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Many medical malpractice cases hinge on the strength of expert testimony, particularly when complex medical conditions are involved. Plaintiffs must not only demonstrate a deviation from the standard of care but also establish that the negligence directly caused harm. This was emphasized in a recent New York medical malpractice case in which the plaintiff sought to demonstrate the liability of a nursing home. If you suspect that a loved one has suffered due to substandard nursing home care, it is advisable to talk to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney about your options.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the decedent, a 94-year-old woman with a history of significant medical conditions, was admitted to the defendant nursing home for rehabilitation following a femur fracture and small bowel obstruction. Reportedly, upon admission, she had stage II pressure ulcers, which were treated in accordance with standard wound care protocols. However, it is alleged that despite ongoing care, her condition worsened, and she ultimately developed a stage IV sacral decubitus ulcer, which became infected with osteomyelitis.

It is reported that the decedent was transferred to a hospital for additional treatment, including a blood transfusion and further wound care, but her overall health continued to deteriorate. She ultimately passed away, with her death certificate citing respiratory failure due to the large sacral ulcer as a contributing factor. The plaintiff, the administrator of the decedent’s estate, filed a lawsuit against the nursing home and its associated staff, asserting claims of medical malpractice and wrongful death. The trial court granted the nursing home’s motion for summary judgment, finding that the plaintiff had failed to establish a triable issue of fact. The plaintiff subsequently appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Disusses Medical Malpractice Claims Against Federal Entities

Published on: January 20, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Numerous healthcare facilities throughout New York are funded by the federal government. While healthcare providers working at such facilities are expected to adhere to established standards of care, establishing liability for medical malpractice for deviations from such standards can be challenging. Specifically, there are additional procedural requirements plaintiffs must adhere to that are not present in actions against non-public entities, and as discussed in a recent New York case, the failure to follow the proper procedure may jeopardize their claims. If you were harmed by negligent medical care and are interested in pursuing an action against the provider responsible for your injuries, it is advisable to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

Case Summary and Allegations

It is alleged that the plaintiff sought treatment at the emergency room of Albany Stratton Veterans Hospital (ASVH) on October 13, 2021, for chronic back pain stemming from an active-duty injury. The emergency room physician prescribed three injections, two of which the plaintiff had previously received without incident. The plaintiff claims that after receiving the injections, he was discharged without the standard post-injection observation period. Upon standing, he blacked out and fell to the floor.

Reportedly, the plaintiff alleged that between October 2021 and March 2022, he made over 20 visits to ASVH and other local emergency rooms due to unrelenting pain. Despite these visits, he contends that his primary care provider at ASVH, a named defendant, delayed ordering diagnostic tests. When tests were eventually conducted, they revealed a fractured spinal fusion from a prior surgery. The plaintiff asserts that this delay caused him significant and ongoing pain, which he rated as a constant 10 out of 10. He further alleges that a medical report by his primary care provider labeling him as an opioid abuser amounted to slander. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit under the FTCA, seeking $150,000 in damages for negligence and medical malpractice. He also applied for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Medical Malpractice Involving Multiple Defendants

Published on: January 12, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

In many cases where a patient has a serious health concern, they will be treated with multiple providers. If they subsequently suffer harm due to substandard care, it may be complicated to determine which provider is ultimately at fault, as demonstrated in a recent New York case. If you or a loved one sustained injuries due to the carelessness of a doctor, it is in your best interest to talk to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney about what evidence you must produce to recover damages.

Case Summary and Allegations

It is alleged that the plaintiff, who underwent spinal surgery performed by the defendant surgeon, was transferred to a rehabilitation facility owned by the co-defendant medical center for postoperative care. The plaintiffs claim that the surgeon and the medical center’s staff failed to provide adequate wound care and monitoring, leading to serious complications. Specifically, they allege that the medical center’s staff prematurely removed the plaintiff’s surgical sutures and neglected to address subsequent signs of infection or wound dehiscence.

Reportedly, these failures resulted in the plaintiff requiring additional medical interventions, including an irrigation and debridement procedure, as well as complex wound closure. The plaintiffs filed suit against the surgeon and the medical center, alleging medical malpractice and seeking damages for the injuries suffered. Following discovery, both defendants moved for summary judgment, asserting that they met the applicable standards of care and that any alleged deviation did not cause the plaintiff’s injuries. The trial court granted both motions, and the plaintiffs appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Compares Medical Malpractice to Ordinary Negligence

Published on: December 19, 2024 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

When injuries occur in a hospital setting, determining whether the claims arise from medical malpractice or ordinary negligence can significantly impact a case’s viability. This distinction often determines the applicable statute of limitations and legal standards for proving liability. A recent New York decision highlights this distinction and how New York courts evaluate such claims. If you or a loved one were injured in a healthcare setting, it is crucial to consult a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to assess your options as soon as you can.

History of the Case

It is alleged that in June 2017, the plaintiff, a 71-year-old patient, sustained injuries when he fell while unattended in the defendant hospital’s bathroom. The plaintiff subsequently filed a lawsuit against the defendant hospital, alleging negligence in failing to provide proper care and supervision. In his complaint and bill of particulars, the plaintiff asserted various claims sounding in ordinary negligence. However, he later acknowledged that some allegations could also be interpreted as claims of medical malpractice.

It is reported that the defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims under CPLR 3211(a)(5), arguing that all allegations were time-barred under the 2½-year statute of limitations applicable to medical malpractice claims. The plaintiff opposed the motion, contending that his claims were rooted in ordinary negligence, which is subject to a three-year statute of limitations. The trial court partially denied the defendant’s motion, finding that some of the plaintiff’s claims sounded in negligence and were, therefore timely. The defendant appealed the decision. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Explains Grounds for Vacating a Jury’s Verdict

Published on: December 16, 2024 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Generally, people pursuing medical malpractice claims will present evidence to a jury to prove that a deviation occurred and caused harm. Juries do not always make rules in accordance with the evidence, though, and if they do not, their verdict may be subject to challenge, as demonstrated in a recent New York ruling. If you were harmed by inadequate medical care, you may be owed damages, and it is smart to speak with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is alleged that the plaintiffs, on behalf of their child, commenced a medical malpractice action against multiple defendants, including a medical practice and a pediatric gastroenterologist. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants failed to diagnose anal stenosis and a rectovaginal fistula between July and December 2018, despite multiple visits and symptoms.

Reportedly, the infant’s primary pediatrician, an employee of the medical practice, saw the infant for a routine well-visit in November 2018 and did not perform a digital rectal examination. Prior to that, the pediatric gastroenterologist examined the infant in September 2018 but similarly did not identify any abnormalities during the visit. The plaintiffs alleged that these failures constituted departures from good and accepted medical practice and led to delays in diagnosing the infant’s condition, which was ultimately confirmed in December 2018.

New York Court Denies Summary Judgment in Medical Malpractice Case

Published on: November 19, 2024 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Medical malpractice cases often involve intricate questions regarding the standard of care and causation. The complexity of such claims was illustrated in a recent New York decision in which the court partially denied a motion for summary judgment in a case alleging negligence in discontinuing seizure medication. If you suffered harm due to negligent medical care, it is prudent to meet with a Syracause medical malpractice attorney to discuss your options.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the plaintiff brought claims of medical malpractice and lack of informed consent against the defendant physician, alleging improper discontinuation of an anti-seizure medication, seizure medication. The plaintiff, who had a history of epilepsy and heavy alcohol use, had been seizure-free for years while on seizure medication. During an April 2018 visit, the plaintiff reportedly told the defendant that he had reduced his seizure medication dosage on his own to simplify his medication routine. Based on this information, the defendant discontinued seizure medication. Subsequently, the plaintiff experienced a grand mal seizure in January 2019, leading to serious injuries.

Reportedly, the plaintiff argued that the defendant deviated from the standard of care by discontinuing the medication without proper evaluation, failing to taper the dosage, and not consulting a neurologist. The defendant sought summary judgment, asserting that her actions were within the standard of care and that any alleged deviations did not cause the plaintiff’s injuries. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Addresses Jurisdiction in Medical Malpractice Claims

Published on: November 15, 2024 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

The legal system provides pathways for individuals to seek remedies for injuries caused by alleged medical malpractice. However, plaintiffs must navigate the jurisdictional requirements to ensure that their claims are appropriately filed. The importance of federal jurisdiction and its limitations in addressing medical malpractice claims was highlighted in a recent ruling in a New York medical malpractice case, in which the court ultimately dismissed the plaintiff’s case. If you were harmed due to a healthcare provider’s negligence, it is critical to understand your rights and your options for pursuing damages, and you should speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to assess your case.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the plaintiff initiated a pro se action against several private medical entities, alleging medical malpractice and constitutional violations arising from purported misdiagnoses and failure to address critical health conditions. Specifically, the plaintiff claimed that she was prescribed unnecessary medications and that medical staff neglected to monitor her vitamin levels, leading to severe harm. The plaintiff sought relief under federal question jurisdiction, alleging violations of her constitutional rights and referencing Medicaid fraud and the False Claims Act.

It is further alleged that the plaintiff included documents from a related state court medical malpractice case involving similar claims. The federal district court, upon review, evaluated the plaintiff’s assertions for sufficiency under federal jurisdiction standards.

Grounds for Federal Jurisdiction

In its analysis, the court emphasized the limited scope of federal jurisdiction, which requires either a federal question or diversity of citizenship between parties. The plaintiff’s claims primarily involved medical malpractice—a matter governed by state law—against private entities. The court noted that private medical facilities do not qualify as state actors capable of triggering federal question jurisdiction under constitutional claims. The court also dismissed any potential FCA claims, as the plaintiff failed to substantiate allegations of fraud against the federal government. Additionally, the plaintiff’s lack of standing to pursue FCA claims pro se precluded further consideration.