Syracuse Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
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.
Demonstrating the Standard of Care and Causation
The defendant submitted expert testimony asserting that discontinuing seizure medication was appropriate because the plaintiff had been seizure-free for four years and had already reduced his dosage. The expert contended that the absence of seizures during this time indicated the plaintiff’s condition was stable, and tapering the medication or consulting a neurologist was unnecessary.
The plaintiff countered with expert testimony challenging these assertions. The plaintiff’s expert opined that discontinuing anti-seizure medication, particularly for a patient with a history of heavy drinking, without neurologic consultation constituted a deviation from the standard of care. The expert also disputed the claim that the plaintiff had been on a subtherapeutic dose, noting inconsistencies in the medical records.
The court reviewed whether the defendant’s actions were a substantial factor in causing the plaintiff’s seizure. The defense argued that the nine-month gap between discontinuation and the seizure made causation unlikely. However, the plaintiff’s expert cited studies indicating that the risk of seizure recurrence remains elevated for up to three years after stopping medication. As such, the court found that this testimony created a triable issue of fact regarding causation.
The defendant successfully argued for dismissal of the lack of informed consent claim, however. The court noted that such claims require evidence of an affirmative violation of bodily integrity, such as surgery or invasive procedures. Here, the plaintiff’s allegations centered on the cessation of treatment, which does not meet the statutory definition of lack of informed consent.
Consult a Trusted Syracuse Medical Malpractice Attorney
If you suffered injuries due to medical negligence, it is crucial to understand your rights and pursue appropriate remedies. The trusted Syracuse medical malpractice attorneys at DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers can evaluate your case and assist you in pursuing any damages recoverable. Contact us at 833-200-2000 or complete our online form to schedule a consultation.
