Syracuse Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

New York Court Assess Evidence in Nursing Home Malpractice Cases

Published on: September 19, 2026 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

When a resident dies after receiving care in a nursing or rehabilitation facility, the family may pursue several related claims against the facility, but each claim requires evidence tailored to its elements. Failing to provide that evidence can be fatal to those claims. This was demonstrated in a recent New York opinion that dismissed malpractice, wrongful death, statutory rights, and negligence claims against one facility after finding the opposing expert proof inadequate. If you are considering pursuing claims in a nursing home injury case, you should consult a Syracuse personal injury attorney to understand which records and expert opinions may be needed.

Case Setting

Allegedly, a patient received care at a nursing and rehabilitation facility and later died. Her representative claimed that negligent medical care at the facility caused the death. The opinion does not detail the specific treatment decisions or explain the medical cause of death, so the appellate ruling turns on the parties’ proof rather than on a full clinical narrative.

Reportedly, the representative filed suit in March 2021 against the facility operator and other defendants. The claims against the operator included medical malpractice, negligence, wrongful death, a nursing home resident-rights claim under Public Health Law section 2801-d, and negligence per se. The operator’s expert reviewed medical records and deposition testimony and concluded that the care met accepted practice and violated no applicable regulation. As such, the operator moved for summary judgment. The trial court refused to dismiss the claims against the operator, and the operator appealed.

New York Court Discusses Late Notice in Birth Injury Cases

Published on: September 16, 2026 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

A medical malpractice claim against a public hospital can face an early procedural hurdle: the notice of claim. Filing late may put the lawsuit at risk even before a court considers whether malpractice occurred, but some claims can survive despite a late filing. This was demonstrated in a recent New York decision in which the court permitted a late notice in a case involving an infant’s claimed birth injury despite a gap in the hospital’s early knowledge of the alleged malpractice. If you are considering a claim against a public hospital, it is advisable to consult promptly with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney about the applicable notice rules.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, an expectant mother received prenatal care at a public hospital in 2020. During a September examination, staff detected a slowing fetal heartbeat and admitted her to induce labor. Months after the infant left the hospital, the child received a diagnosis of cystic encephalomalacia. The mother stated that hospital staff had previously described the symptoms she observed as normal and that she learned of the condition only after seeking additional medical opinions in March 2021.

Reportedly, the mother and infant sought permission in December 2021 to serve a late notice of claim. They asserted that malpractice during the mother’s care caused the infant’s injuries. They supplied a proposed notice and the mother’s affidavit explaining the delay. The trial court denied their petition and effectively ended the proceeding. The petitioners appealed, asking the appellate court to permit the notice despite its lateness.

New York Court Distinguishes Medical Malpractice from Ordinary Negligence

Published on: August 28, 2026 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Care in a nursing and rehabilitation facility can involve everyday safety obligations and specialized medical judgment. That distinction matters because a malpractice claim generally requires qualified expert evidence addressing professional standards. When the expert’s opinion is speculative or introduces a theory absent from the pleadings, the claim may end before trial. As a recent New York ruling shows, the substance of the challenged treatment, rather than its label, controls how a court evaluates it. If you or a loved one were harmed by negligent nursing or rehabilitative care, a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney can help assess your options.

Factual and Procedural Setting

Allegedly, the decedent received treatment from the defendant nursing and rehabilitation facility. He filed an action against the facility in June 2020, asserting causes of action including medical malpractice and ordinary negligence. After the decedent died, the plaintiff, acting as executor of his estate, replaced him as the party pursuing the claims. The opinion did not identify the specific treatment acts or omissions underlying the lawsuit.

Reportedly, the parties completed discovery, after which the defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the malpractice and negligence claims. The defendant supported its motion with an affidavit from a physical therapist who reviewed the medical records, deposition testimony, and pleadings. The expert concluded that the facility’s treatment complied with accepted medical practice. The plaintiff opposed the motion with a separate expert affirmation. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Evaluates Expert Proof in a Surgical Malpractice Claim

Published on: August 15, 2026 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

A hysterectomy can become far more dangerous when a nearby ureter sustains damage, causing leakage and additional treatment. A surgical complication alone, however, does not establish malpractice. Instead, an injured patient must present expert evidence identifying a departure from accepted practice and connecting it to the harm, which typically requires expert testimony. A recent New York opinion demonstrates, however, that expert testimony that relies on a theory contradicted by the operative record or ignores the defense explanation may not be sufficient to sustain a claim. If you sustained injuries during a gynecological surgery, it is in your best interest to consult a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to assess your potential claims.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the plaintiff underwent a hysterectomy at the defendant hospital to remove a cancerous tumor. Two defendant physicians performed the procedure. The plaintiff later sustained damage to her right ureter, the tube that carries urine from the kidney to the bladder, and developed leakage several days after surgery. She asserted that the defendants negligently failed to protect the ureter, injured it during the operation, and failed to perform appropriate postoperative testing.

New York Court Discusses Summary Judgment in Birth Injury Cases

Published on: July 15, 2026 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Birth injury cases often center on whether healthcare providers acted quickly enough when complications developed during labor and delivery. A recent New York decision demonstrates that medical malpractice claims involving delayed cesarean sections frequently depend on competing expert testimony regarding the applicable standard of care and whether any delay caused a newborn’s injuries. If your child suffered a preventable birth injury because of delayed medical intervention during labor and delivery, you may be owed damages, and you should speak with an experienced Syracuse medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

History of the Case

Allegedly, the plaintiff commenced a medical malpractice action against several healthcare providers involved in the child’s delivery. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants failed to timely perform a cesarean section during labor and that this delay caused the infant to sustain birth-related injuries.

It is reported that the defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that they did not depart from accepted medical practice and that their conduct did not cause the infant’s injuries. The trial court initially granted the motion and dismissed the claims against those defendants. The plaintiff then moved for leave to reargue, asserting that the court had overlooked the defendants’ improper reliance, in their reply papers, on a new argument that an in-house obstetrician had been notified of the patient’s condition and decided not to proceed with a cesarean section. Upon re-argument, the trial court vacated its prior ruling and denied summary judgment. The defendants appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Duties Imposed on Emergency Room Doctors

Published on: July 10, 2026 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Emergency physicians often focus on the condition that brings a patient to the hospital, but abnormal laboratory findings discovered during that evaluation cannot always be ignored. When test results suggest the presence of a potentially serious disease, the emergency physician may have a duty to recognize their significance, communicate those findings to the patient, and recommend appropriate follow-up care. A recent New York medical malpractice decision examined the duty an emergency physician has to respond to abnormal laboratory results. If you believe an emergency room doctor’s failure to diagnose or communicate a dangerous medical condition caused serious harm, you should speak with an experienced Syracuse medical malpractice attorney.

Factual and Procedural History

Allegedly, the decedent sought treatment in a hospital emergency department after experiencing abnormal vaginal bleeding for approximately two weeks. During the evaluation, the emergency physician ordered laboratory testing that revealed a blood glucose level of 250 mg/dL, a result identified as abnormally high. After addressing the patient’s gynecological complaints, the physician discharged her with instructions to follow up with her obstetrician-gynecologist. Although she received copies of her laboratory results, the discharge instructions focused on her bleeding and did not specifically direct her to obtain further evaluation for her elevated glucose level.

It is reported that approximately six weeks later, the patient developed diabetic ketoacidosis and died. Her estate subsequently filed a medical malpractice action alleging that the emergency physician failed to recognize the significance of the abnormal glucose finding, failed to adequately advise the patient regarding its potential implications, and failed to recommend prompt follow-up with an appropriate physician for further testing and treatment. The emergency physician moved for summary judgment seeking dismissal of the claims. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses How Errors Can Lead to a New Medical Malpractice Trial

Published on: June 23, 2026 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Medical malpractice cases often involve conflicting medical evidence that juries must carefully evaluate before reaching a verdict. Because jurors are responsible for resolving disputed factual issues, trial courts must ensure they have meaningful access to the evidence admitted during trial and provide appropriate guidance during deliberations. A recent New York opinion demonstrates that even when a jury’s factual findings are supported by the evidence, significant errors during deliberations may still require a new trial. If you or a loved one suffered injuries because of negligent medical care, you should speak with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to learn how procedural errors can affect the outcome of a medical malpractice case.

Factual and Procedural History

Allegedly, the plaintiffs commenced a medical malpractice action against several healthcare providers, asserting that they failed to timely diagnose and treat an infant’s arachnoid cyst and failed to refer the child to a neurologist or neurosurgeon. The plaintiffs contended that these departures from accepted medical practice delayed appropriate treatment and ultimately caused the child to sustain permanent brain injuries.

Reportedly, following a jury trial, the jury determined that two of the defendants did not depart from accepted standards of medical care. The jury further found that another healthcare provider departed from the applicable standard of care by failing to make an appropriate specialist referral during one office visit, but concluded that the departure was not a substantial factor in causing the child’s injuries. The plaintiffs moved to set aside portions of the verdict and to request a new trial, arguing that errors during the trial prevented the jury from fairly considering the evidence. After the trial court denied that request, the plaintiffs appealed. Continue Reading ›

Ruling in New York Medical Malpractice Case Shows Importance of Expert Testimony

Published on: June 18, 2026 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Patients trust their healthcare providers to recognize warning signs of serious illnesses and promptly order appropriate testing or referrals. When a diagnosis is delayed, however, proving that the delay actually changed the patient’s outcome often becomes one of the most heavily contested issues in a medical malpractice lawsuit. A recent New York ruling highlights why detailed and well-supported expert testimony is essential for establishing both negligence and causation in delayed-diagnosis cases. If you believe a delayed diagnosis caused you or a loved one to suffer unnecessary harm, you should speak with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to discuss your legal rights and potential remedies.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the plaintiff commenced a medical malpractice action against several healthcare providers, asserting that they failed to diagnose and treat multiple myeloma in a timely manner. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants departed from accepted medical practice by failing to recognize signs of the disease and that the delayed diagnosis caused significant injuries. During the litigation, the original plaintiff filed for bankruptcy, and the trustee of the bankruptcy estate was substituted as the plaintiff in the action.

Reportedly, after discovery concluded, the defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that their medical care complied with accepted standards of practice and that any alleged diagnostic delay did not cause the plaintiff’s injuries or alter the patient’s prognosis. The trial court granted the motion and dismissed the claims against the moving defendants. The plaintiff appealed, arguing that disputed issues of fact required the case to proceed to trial. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Reinforces Requirements for Reopening Dismissed Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: May 18, 2026 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Medical malpractice lawsuits are governed by strict procedural rules, and failing to comply with court orders can have serious consequences regardless of the merits of a claim. Courts expect litigants and their attorneys to actively prosecute their cases and attend scheduled conferences throughout the litigation process. A recent New York opinion demonstrates the challenges plaintiffs face in reviving a medical malpractice action after it has been dismissed for failure to appear in court. If you were harmed by negligent medical treatment, it is important to protect your rights from the outset, and you should speak with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney about your potential claims.

History of the Case

Allegedly, the plaintiff commenced a medical malpractice action in April 2021 arising out of physical therapy treatment provided by the defendants. The plaintiff claimed that the defendants’ care caused her injuries and sought damages through a civil lawsuit.

Reportedly, the litigation proceeded until a court-ordered conference scheduled for September 2022. Neither party appeared for the conference, and the court therefore directed that the action be dismissed without prejudice. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Clarifies When Medical Malpractice Plaintiffs May Amend Their Claims

Published on: May 4, 2026 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Medical malpractice litigation often evolves as expert review and discovery reveal additional information about the nature and extent of a patient’s injuries. As a result, disputes frequently arise over whether a plaintiff should be permitted to amend pleadings or bills of particulars to more accurately reflect the evidence developed during litigation. A recent New York decision illustrates the circumstances under which courts may allow such amendments and highlights the importance of demonstrating prejudice when opposing a request to conform pleadings to the proof. If you suffered injuries due to negligent medical treatment, it is important to understand your legal rights, and you should speak with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney about your potential claims.

Factual and Procedural Background

Allegedly, the plaintiff commenced a medical malpractice action arising out of eye surgery performed by the defendant physician. The plaintiff contended that a phacoemulsification procedure caused numerous complications, including blurry vision, eye pain, headaches, double vision, visual distortion between the eyes, instability while walking, and the need for additional corrective surgery. The plaintiff maintained that these injuries resulted directly from negligent medical treatment.

Reportedly, the parties engaged in discovery, and the defendants later moved for summary judgment, seeking dismissal of the action. The plaintiff successfully opposed those motions, and the court determined that material questions of fact existed regarding the treatment provided and the cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. Continue Reading ›