Articles Posted in Medical Malpractice

When pursuing a medical malpractice claim, a plaintiff must not only establish that negligence occurred but also ensure that all responsible parties are named in the lawsuit in a timely manner. However, when procedural missteps or confusion about proper parties arise, courts may apply the “relation-back” doctrine to prevent unjust technical dismissals. A recent decision demonstrates how New York courts analyze whether a plaintiff may amend a complaint to reintroduce defendants after the statute of limitations has expired. If you believe that a medical provider’s negligence caused you harm, it is vital to contact a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

Case Setting

It is reported that the plaintiffs commenced a medical malpractice action against multiple healthcare providers following medical treatment received by the injured plaintiff. The initial complaint included two defendants associated with a wound care practice, a physician, and a medical corporation. Still, when the plaintiffs later filed an amended complaint, those parties were no longer listed as defendants. Counsel for the omitted parties sought a stipulation of discontinuance to formalize their removal, but the plaintiffs’ prior attorney never executed such a stipulation.

It is further alleged that the plaintiffs subsequently retained new counsel, who moved to amend the complaint once again, this time seeking to add the previously omitted physician and corporation as defendants. By then, the statute of limitations for filing new medical malpractice claims had expired. The defendants opposed the amendment, arguing that the claims against them were time-barred and that reinstating them as defendants would cause undue prejudice. The trial court nonetheless granted the plaintiffs’ motion to amend the complaint, and the nonparty appellants appealed. Continue Reading ›

Patients trust their doctors to recognize the red flags hidden in lab results and to act quickly when those results suggest something serious. When physicians overlook or fail to communicate critical findings, patients can lose valuable time in fighting diseases like cancer. In such instances, the injured party will often seek accountability via medical malpractice claims, but if they do so without adequate expert support, their claim may be dismissed. A recent decision from a New York court shows how disputes over expert testimony can decide whether a malpractice claim is dismissed or moves forward. If you or a loved one has suffered because of a delayed cancer diagnosis, it is essential to seek legal advice from a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney who can ensure your voice is heard.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff was under the care of his primary physician, who ordered bloodwork, including prostate-specific antigen testing, in 2016, 2017, and 2018. The plaintiff’s PSA levels rose above the normal range in 2017 and again in 2018. In April 2017, the physician referred the plaintiff to a urologist, but the referral listed only hematuria as the reason, omitting any mention of elevated PSA results.

Allegedly, the plaintiff did not pursue a urological evaluation until 2019, after changing doctors. A new physician referred him to another urologist, who performed a biopsy that revealed prostate cancer. The plaintiff then commenced a malpractice action in 2021 against the physician and associated medical practices, asserting that the delay in diagnosis caused his condition to worsen. Continue Reading ›

The COVID-19 pandemic reshaped nearly every aspect of daily life, including how patients accessed medical care and how providers delivered it. Courts are still grappling with the legal consequences of those extraordinary circumstances. A recent New York decision highlights how temporary immunity laws enacted during the public health crisis continue to influence medical malpractice litigation today. If you suffered harm due to incompetent medical care and you have questions about how pandemic-related laws may affect your potential case, it is critical to speak with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the plaintiff sought treatment from the defendant physician on March 16, 2020, for nausea, constipation, and vomiting. The physician, who practiced with a gastroenterology group, examined the plaintiff in his office at that time.

Allegedly, the plaintiff’s symptoms continued, and the defendant’s office closed on March 23, 2020, pursuant to the statewide emergency declaration. It is alleged that thereafter, the defendant communicated with the plaintiff by telephone on April 1, April 3, and April 6, 2020. On April 6, the plaintiff presented to a hospital and underwent emergency surgery for a bowel obstruction. Continue Reading ›

When people seek care in a hospital setting, they expect to receive careful monitoring and timely treatment. Unfortunately, the care offered often falls below what is considered acceptable, and people suffer from serious complications that sometimes occur not because of illness alone but because medical providers fail to act when action is most critical. In these situations, families are left to wonder whether negligence played a role in the outcome. A recent New York ruling demonstrates how courts analyze expert testimony and competing claims in medical malpractice cases. If you or a family member suffered harm following treatment in a hospital, speaking with a knowledgeable Syracuse medical malpractice attorney can help you understand your legal options and whether you may be entitled to compensation.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff’s decedent, who had a history of diabetes, hypertension, and other health issues, was admitted to the defendant hospital for treatment. While under the hospital’s care, the decedent allegedly developed complications that included respiratory distress and cardiac issues. Despite various interventions by the hospital staff, the decedent’s condition deteriorated, and the decedent ultimately passed away.

It is further reported that the plaintiff, as administrator of the decedent’s estate, commenced an action against the defendant hospital, asserting claims of medical malpractice and wrongful death. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant’s staff failed to provide appropriate monitoring, treatment, and timely interventions, and that such departures from the standard of care directly caused the decedent’s death. Continue Reading ›

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. Continue Reading ›

When people are incarcerated, they do not forfeit their right to adequate medical treatment. Sadly, though, it is not uncommon for delays or failures in prison health care to cause devastating, permanent harm. A recent ruling from a New York court highlights the legal threshold for pursuing medical claims in a correctional setting. If you or a loved one has experienced inadequate medical care while in custody or in a public facility, a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney can help evaluate your legal rights.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff, who was incarcerated at a federal facility, began experiencing complications following eye surgery to address cataracts. After undergoing a procedure on his left eye, which involved placement of stabilizing metal hooks, the plaintiff initially seemed to recover. However, he soon developed blurred vision and persistent pain. Despite notifying facility medical staff of his worsening symptoms, he was allegedly told to wait and see whether the condition would resolve on its own.

It is alleged that the plaintiff eventually experienced a detached retina but was not immediately transferred for emergency medical care. After declaring a medical emergency, he was examined by nursing personnel and a nurse practitioner, but was not hospitalized until several days later. By that time, the damage had reportedly progressed, resulting in lasting visual impairment, headaches, and ongoing complications. The plaintiff initiated a federal lawsuit asserting that the delayed response violated his constitutional rights and contributed to permanent injury. Continue Reading ›

Medical malpractice claims in New York often hinge on whether expert testimony establishes both a deviation from accepted medical standards and causation. If a defendant offers competent expert evidence showing that care was appropriate and that no harm resulted from any alleged error, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to offer a meaningful rebuttal. A recent decision from a New York court demonstrates this principle, as the court upheld the dismissal of a case involving postoperative complications, finding that the plaintiff’s opposition lacked the necessary expert support to proceed. If you suffered harm after surgery and believe your care was mishandled, it is critical to consult an experienced Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to protect your rights.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent surgery for the removal of a tumor located on his adrenal gland. The procedure was performed by the defendant surgeon, who was employed by a university-affiliated hospital. Following the operation, the plaintiff developed complications, including a hematoma and nerve damage, which allegedly caused ongoing pain and functional limitations.

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant surgeon and his employer, asserting that the defendants failed to properly perform the adrenalectomy and failed to adequately manage his postoperative condition. The complaint alleged that this conduct fell below the applicable standard of medical care and directly resulted in the plaintiff’s injuries. Continue Reading ›

Medical malpractice verdicts must rest on legally sufficient evidence linking a physician’s conduct to a patient’s injuries. In other words, even when a jury finds a departure from accepted standards of care, that finding must be supported by proof that the departure caused harm. The importance of establishing proximate cause through expert testimony was illustrated by a recent New York ruling in which the court overturned a jury verdict in favor of a plaintiff who alleged inadequate treatment of an eye condition, holding that the evidence at trial failed to support the required legal standard. If you believe you were injured due to negligent medical treatment, you should consult with a seasoned Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to evaluate your case.

Factual and Procedural Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent LASIK eye surgery in September 2014 by a third-party physician and remained under that provider’s care until late October 2014. On October 27, 2014, the plaintiff began treatment with the defendant, an ophthalmologist, for post-surgical complications. These complications included symptoms suggestive of diffuse lamellar keratitis, a noninfectious inflammatory condition affecting the cornea.

It is alleged that the plaintiff’s condition worsened, and by November 18, 2014, she was under the care of a third ophthalmologist who took a culture from her right eye. On December 1, 2014, she was diagnosed with infectious keratitis, and shortly thereafter, she began antibiotic treatment. The plaintiff initiated a medical malpractice action against multiple parties, including the defendant physician and his professional corporation, claiming that they failed to diagnose and treat the infection appropriately by not performing a culture during her care. Continue Reading ›

In emergency care settings, medical providers must quickly evaluate and treat injuries based on available information. However, patients also bear responsibility for following through with recommended care, and if they fail to do so, it may undermine any medical malpractice claims they later choose to pursue, as demonstrated in a recent New York decision. If you were harmed due to suspected negligence in a hospital setting, a knowledgeable Syracuse medical malpractice attorney can help evaluate your potential claims.

Facts of the Case and Procedural Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff was transported to the emergency department of a hospital operated by the defendant after sustaining a forearm laceration in a workplace accident on November 2, 2016. At the hospital, the injured plaintiff received an X-ray, wound cleaning, sutures, and dressing. He was discharged the same day with instructions to return for a follow-up appointment within two days.

It is alleged that the injured plaintiff did not return to the hospital for his scheduled follow-up visit but instead consulted with unaffiliated physicians. The plaintiff ultimately underwent surgery to repair several damaged tendons in his forearm. He and his spouse subsequently filed a lawsuit alleging that the hospital failed to properly diagnose and treat his injuries during the emergency department visit. The plaintiffs contended that the failure to detect and promptly repair the tendon damage constituted a deviation from accepted medical practice. The defendant hospital moved for summary judgment, seeking dismissal of the complaint on the grounds that its care was appropriate and did not cause the plaintiff’s injuries. The trial court denied the motion in part, allowing the medical malpractice claim to proceed. The hospital appealed. Continue Reading ›