Syracuse Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

In the context of medical care, a treatment that is intended to help a patient will sometimes cause them harm instead. In such instances, the patient may be able to seek compensation through medical malpractice claims against the provider responsible for their injuries. Merely demonstrating that they sustained damages is insufficient to establish liability, however. Instead, they must prove that the defendant violated the standard of care and that by doing so, they caused their losses. If a plaintiff cannot meet this evidentiary burden, their claim will be dismissed, as illustrated recently in a ruling issued in a New York medical malpractice case. If you suffered harm due to incompetent medical care, you could be owed damages, and it is prudent to meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to discuss your rights.

The Plaintiff’s Assertions

It is reported that the plaintiff presented to the defendant with complaints of blood in his urine. The defendant inserted a Foley catheter in the plaintiff, which reportedly caused him to suffer significant pain, incontinence, and injuries to his bladder. The plaintiff subsequently filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant, alleging their negligent insertion of the catheter caused him to suffer harm. The defendant moved for dismissal of the plaintiff’s action via summary judgment. The trial court granted the defendant’s motion, and the plaintiff appealed.

Burdens of Proof in New York Medical Malpractice Cases

Under New York law, to establish the liability of a doctor for medical malpractice, a plaintiff must prove that the doctor departed from the standards of practice accepted in the community and that the deviation proximately caused the plaintiff to suffer injuries. Thus, a defendant moving for summary judgment must prove, prima facie, that there either was no deviation from the applicable standard of care or that any deviation that occurred did not injure the plaintiff. Continue Reading ›

Under New York law, there are strict deadlines that people who wish to pursue medical malpractice claims must abide by, and the failure to file necessary documents or pleadings within the specified time frame can be fatal to a plaintiff’s claim. For example, if a plaintiff wants to pursue medical malpractice claims against a hospital run by a municipality, they must provide the municipality with notice of their claim shortly after their harm occurs. As shown in a recent New York opinion, the courts take the notice requirement seriously and will dismiss a plaintiff’s medical malpractice claim for lack of timely notice. If you were injured by a negligent health care provider, it is important to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer as soon as possible to avoid waiving your right to recover damages.

The Procedural History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff underwent unspecified treatment at a health care facility operated by the defendant municipal corporation and subsequently sustained harm as a result of the defendant’s negligence. She later filed a petition for leave to file a late notice of claim. The trial court denied her petition, and she appealed. She then filed a motion to renew the petition. The court denied her motion, and she once again appealed.

Notice Requirements in Medical Malpractice Claims Against Public Corporations

On appeal, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s ruling. The appellate court noted that the plaintiff failed to show that the defendant had actual knowledge of the facts surrounding her medical malpractice claim within ninety days of when the claim arose or within a reasonable time after the ninety-day deadline had passed. Further, the defendant’s medical records did not demonstrate that any of the medical staff that treated the plaintiff caused her to suffer harm, either via act or omission. Continue Reading ›

In New York, the courts will decide many medical malpractice cases prior to trial. The New York courts have clearly defined what each party must prove in order to garner a ruling in their favor as a matter of law, and if a court finds that one party has met its burden while the other has not, it will most likely grant summary judgment. This was illustrated in a recent opinion delivered by a New York court in a case in which the plaintiff sought damages for medical malpractice after he developed complications following gall bladder surgery. If you were hurt by insufficient medical care, it is wise to consult a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to determine your options for seeking damages.

The Facts of the Case

Allegedly, the plaintiff was diagnosed with gallstones, after which he underwent an endoscopic procedure performed by the defendant. The defendant removed the stones then converted the surgery to an open surgery during which he removed the plaintiff’s gallbladder and resected his stomach. After the procedure, the plaintiff suffered from numerous complications, including a fistula and bilious drainage. He then filed a lawsuit, alleging that the defendant committed medical malpractice. The defendant moved for summary judgment, and his motion was granted. The plaintiff then appealed.

Establishing the Right to Judgment as a Matter of Law in New York Medical Malpractice Cases

On appeal, the appellate court explained that the essential elements of a medical malpractice case are a departure from the accepted practice of medicine and proof that the departure proximately caused the plaintiff’s injuries. If a defendant moves for summary judgment, they must make a prima facie showing that they did not deviate from the standard of care or that their deviation did not cause the plaintiff to suffer any injury. Continue Reading ›

During a medical malpractice trial, the parties will typically present all of the evidence in their favor and ask the jury to make decisions regarding issues like liability and damages. Juries do not always come to conclusions plaintiffs want them to, however, and plaintiffs that receive unfavorable verdicts may ask the court to vacate the juries’ rulings. Motions to vacate judgments are rarely granted, though, and plaintiffs arguing vacatur is appropriate to face a high burden of proof, as discussed by a New York court in a recent medical malpractice case. If you were injured by a negligent physician, you might be able to pursue claims for damages, and it is wise to talk to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer about your options.

The Procedural History

It is alleged that the defendant performed an elective plastic surgery procedure on the plaintiff. The plaintiff suffered nerve damage during the procedure and subsequently filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant. The matter proceeded to trial, and the jury issued a verdict in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff moved to vacate the verdict and for a new trial. The trial court denied her motion, and she appealed.

Grounds for Seeking a Motion to Vacate a Judgment in a Medical Malpractice Case

The appellate court affirmed the trial court ruling denying the plaintiff’s motion. While the plaintiff argued that she had newly discovered evidence that necessitated a new trial, the court found that even if she established the evidence was in fact novel, she failed to show that it was not merely cumulative or that it was material to the issues in dispute. Further, she failed to prove the evidence was not merely being offered to impeach the credibility of a witness that testified for the defense, or that it was likely to change the outcome of the case.  As such, the appellate court found that the trial court’s ruling was not issued in error. Continue Reading ›

A plaintiff’s burden of proof in New York medical malpractice cases is clearly established. Specifically, in order to impose liability on a health care provider, a plaintiff must prove that the defendant provider departed from the appropriate standard of care and the divergence proximately caused the plaintiff to suffer harm. While it is not uncommon for either party to seek judgment in their favor as a matter of law prior to proceeding to trial, summary judgment will not be granted if the court determines that there is a factual dispute that must be resolved by a jury. This was illustrated recently in a ruling issued by a New York court in a medical malpractice action. If you suffered losses due to the acts of a reckless doctor, you might be owed damages, and you should meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the defendant treated the decedent, who was suffering from falling sodium levels after an injury. The decedent ultimately succumbed to his harm. The plaintiff then brought medical malpractice claims against the defendant, arguing his negligent management of the decedent’s sodium levels led to his demise. The defendant moved for summary judgment, asking the court to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint in its entirety. The trial court denied the motion, and the plaintiff appealed.

Issues of Material Fact in Medical Malpractice Cases

On appeal, the trial court affirmed the appellate court ruling, finding that there were disputed issues of material fact that precluded judgment in favor of the defendant. Specifically, while the defendant argued that he did not depart from the accepted and good practice of medicine in the treatment of the decedent, the plaintiff presented expert testimony showing that the delays in administering medication and performing surgical interventions constituted a deviation from the standard of care. Continue Reading ›

Generally, people harmed by negligent medical care in New York can pursue medical malpractice claims against the individuals that caused their injuries. There are some exceptions, though, that essentially bar the imposition of personal liability against certain parties. For example, New York law prohibits parties from seeking to recover damages from employees of the state correctional facilities in their individual capacity, regardless of what harm they cause. In a recent New York medical malpractice case, a court-enforced this law and dismissed the plaintiff’s claims. If you or someone you love were hurt by a careless physician, it is in your best interest to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer about your rights.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

Reportedly, when the plaintiff was confined to a federal facility, he injured his finger. He sought treatment for his finger from the defendant, who advised that it was dislocated but not broken. The plaintiff sought additional treatment on numerous occasions, but his treatment was repeatedly deferred. He ultimately underwent surgery almost six months after the injury occurred. Due to the delays in obtaining appropriate care, however, he suffered a permanent loss of mobility.

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit setting forth numerous causes of action against the defendant, including medical malpractice claims. The defendant moved to dismiss the medical malpractice claims on the grounds that they were barred by New York law. Continue Reading ›

Health care practitioners accused of medical malpractice will often seek dismissal of the claims against them though a motion for summary judgment. In most cases, the courts will only grant a motion for summary judgment if the defendant submits an expert report sufficient to meet their burden of proof. As discussed in a recent New York opinion, this means that the opinion must assert that the defendant did not diverge from the accepted standard of care or that any divergence did not cause the harm suffered by the plaintiff. If you were hurt by incompetent care offered by a physician, it is advisable to meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer about your potential claims.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent received care at a medical center operated by the federal government. He ultimately suffered injuries due to mistakes made when he was intubated. He later died from unrelated causes. Following his death, his estate filed medical malpractice claims against the federal government. After discovery closed, the defendant moved for dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims through summary judgment.

Expert Reports Sufficient to Meet a Defendant’s Burden of Proof

Although the claims were pursued in federal court, they arose out of New York law. As such, the court applied New York law to the claims. In New York, a defendant seeking dismissal of medical malpractice claims must establish their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by proving that they did not depart from the accepted and good practice of medicine when treating the plaintiff and that any alleged departure did not cause the plaintiff harm. Typically, this is demonstrated via an expert opinion. Continue Reading ›

Under New York law, medical malpractice claims are comprised of two elements. In other words, a plaintiff in a medical malpractice lawsuit must not only show that the defendant departed from the customary practice of medicine but also that the departure caused the plaintiff to suffer harm. If the plaintiff fails to establish either element, their claim will be dismissed; however, if they introduce evidence sufficient to demonstrate an issue of fact with regard to both elements, their case will likely proceed to trial. The evidence needed to support medical malpractice claims was the topic of a recent New York opinion. If you were harmed by inadequate medical care, it is advisable for you to confer with a  Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to discuss your potential claims.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff suffered injuries when his ring finger struck a ceiling fan. He treated with the defendant doctor at the defendant hospital and was diagnosed with a fracture of the left finger. He underwent a surgical repair of the fracture and later underwent a second procedure to remove the pins from his finger. He subsequently needed additional surgeries to address issues with mobility and stability.

Reportedly, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit in which he asserted, among other things, medical malpractice claims against the defendants. The defendants ultimately moved for summary judgment. After reviewing the evidence submitted, the court denied the motion. Continue Reading ›