Syracuse Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Court Discusses Establishing Liability for Medical Malpractice Under New York Law

Published on: October 23, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

While many psychiatric illnesses do not cause physical symptoms, they can nonetheless result in significant injuries if they are not properly treated. For example, if a doctor fails to observe a patient is harboring suicidal thoughts, it can have devastating consequences. Merely, because a patient who treated with a psychiatrist dies by suicide does not necessarily mean the psychiatrist committed malpractice, however. Rather, the deceased person’s estate must still prove all of the elements of a medical malpractice claim to recover damages, as demonstrated in a recent New York ruling. If you or a loved one suffered harm due to the negligence of a psychiatrist, you might be able to recover damages, and it is smart to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to assess what evidence you must produce to establish liability.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the decedent treated with the defendant due to chronic depression. The defendant primarily treated people with depression that was not mitigated by traditional medications by administering ketamine. He subsequently treated the decedent with a ketamine infusion, which caused an immediate short-term worsening of his symptoms. There is no evidence that the defendant was aware of this, however.

Allegedly, the decedent returned for additional infusions and subsequently responded in a similar manner. The defendant evaluated the decedent as being at his chronic baseline despite the treatments but did not believe he was acutely at risk. Shortly thereafter, the decedent took his own life by overdosing on narcotics. The decedent’s spouse filed a lawsuit against the defendant, asserting medical malpractice claim and other causes of action. The defendant moved for summary judgment. The court ultimately granted the motion. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Liability for the Failure to Diagnose a Patient

Published on: October 12, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

A missed diagnosis can cause irreparable damages, and in many instances, the harm suffered is fatal. Simply because a patient dies after being improperly diagnosed does not automatically mean their family can recover compensation, however. Rather, the survivors must prove the doctor in question committed medical malpractice, and if they cannot, their claims may be dismissed. This was illustrated in a recent New York opinion issued in a hospital malpractice case. If you sustained losses after you received an incorrect diagnosis l, you could be owed compensation, and you should meet with a Syracuse failure to diagnose malpractice lawyer to discuss your options.

The Decedent’s Harm

It is reported that the decedent, who was a minor, was taken to the emergency department of a hospital with complaints of a persistent cough with blood. Doctors at the hospital diagnosed him with bronchitis, gave him a prescription, and discharged him. Three days later, he was transported via ambulance to a second hospital due to difficulty breathing, and he was assessed as having a viral infection.

Allegedly, he was directed to finish his prescription and follow up with his primary care physician. Tragically, he died one day later. The cause of death was determined to be pulmonary embolisms. His mother commenced a medical malpractice lawsuit against both hospitals, alleging their failure to properly diagnose the decedent caused his death. The defendants moved for summary judgment, and the trial court granted the motion. The plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Proving Direct and Vicarious Liability in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: October 8, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Many people suffering from acute or chronic issues receive medical treatment from a provider working for a hospital or health care facility. As such, if they subsequently suffer harm due to incompetent care, they may not only be able to pursue medical malpractice claims against the doctor but also against the entity that employed them. A plaintiff in a medical malpractice lawsuit must demonstrate the defendant doctor’s negligence, however; otherwise, their claims against both the doctor and the hospital may be dismissed. This was demonstrated in a recent opinion issued by a New York court in a case alleging medical malpractice and vicarious liability claims. If you suffered harm due to incompetent care rendered in a hospital, you might be owed damages, and you should speak to a Syracuse hospital malpractice lawyer regarding your rights.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations

It is alleged that the plaintiff was treated with the defendant doctor at the defendant hospital for an unspecified condition. She later suffered harm, which she alleged arose out of the defendant doctor’s negligent care. As such, she filed a medical malpractice lawsuit, asserting that the defendant doctor was directly liable for her injuries, and the defendant hospital was vicariously liable. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiff failed to meet her burden of proof. The court agreed with the defendants and issued an order dismissing the plaintiff’s claims. The plaintiff appealed.

Proving Direct and Vicarious Liability in Medical Malpractice Cases

The appellate court found the trial court’s reasoning to be sound and affirmed the ruling. The court explained that the defendant doctor satisfied his initial burden of proof with regard to both the deviation and causation aspect of the plaintiff’s claim by submitting an affidavit opining that he did not depart from the good and accepted practice of medicine and that the treatment he offered the plaintiff did not proximately cause her to suffer harm. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Punitive Damages in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: October 5, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Incompetent medical treatment can cause significant injuries, and many people harmed by incompetent medical care can recover compensation. While typically, the damages awarded in medical malpractice cases aims to compensate the injured party for the non-economic and economic losses suffered due to negligent healthcare, in some instances, a judge or jury may find it appropriate to impose punitive damages as well. Recently, a New York court issued an opinion discussing when such damages are appropriate in an emergency room malpractice matter in which it ultimately denied the plaintiff’s claim for punitive damages. If you suffered harm because of careless treatment for an acute condition, it is prudent to consult a Syracuse emergency room malpractice lawyer to discuss what damages you may be owed.

The Plaintiff’s Claims

It is reported that the plaintiff visited the emergency room of the defendant hospital, where she was treated by the defendant doctor for a wound on her abdomen. Her condition worsened, and she subsequently had to undergo surgery. She filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendants seeking, among other things, punitive damages. The defendants moved for summary judgment as to the punitive damages claims, and the court denied the motion. The defendants then appealed.

Punitive Damages in Medical Malpractice Cases

On appeal, the appellate court reversed the trial court ruling. The appellate court explained that the standard for imposing punitive damages is strict, and therefore, they will only be awarded in exceptional cases. The appellate court elaborated that the conduct justifying the award must manifest malice or spite, or an evil or fraudulent motive on behalf of the defendant, or such a deliberate and knowing disregard of the interests of other people that the conduct can be considered wanton or willful. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Denies Leave to Amend Complaint to Include Lack of Informed Consent Claim

Published on: September 24, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Many people who serve in the military obtain medical treatment through governmental health systems. Doctors employed by the government are required to comply with the same standard of care imposed on other physicians, and if they do not, they can be held accountable for any harm they cause. A plaintiff alleging a government employee committed medical malpractice is held to a different requirements than those pursuing claims against private workers, however, and if they do not comply with them, their claims may be dismissed. In a recent ruling, a New York court explained the obligations imposed on a person pursuing claims against the government in a case in which the plaintiff alleged losses due to the negligence of her plastic surgeons. If you suffered injuries during a cosmetic procedure, you should speak to a Syracuse plastic surgeon malpractice lawyer to discuss what you must prove to recover damages.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the plaintiff, a former member of the United States armed forces, suffered a back injury in 2009. She was treated at a hospital owned by the defendant government agency for back pain, neck pain, and headaches caused by her injury. Doctors employed by the defendant advised her that if she underwent a breast reduction, it would lessen her symptoms. She ultimately underwent a bilateral breast reduction which was performed by the defendant’s doctors. Following the surgery, she experienced pain, deformities, and significant scarring.

Allegedly, the plaintiff submitted an administrative claim to the defendant, setting forth the basis of her claim and the injuries sustained. She did not, however, indicate that she intended to pursue damages for lack of informed consent. The defendant denied her claim, after which she filed a lawsuit seeking damages for medical malpractice. She then moved to amend her complaint to include a claim for lack of informed consent. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Procedure in Medical Malpractice Cases Filed in Federal Court

Published on: September 21, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Medical malpractice cases filed in federal court are often subject to levels of review not present at the state level. For example, if a party files a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment, the motion may be referred to a magistrate judge, who will make a recommendation to the court regarding whether to grant or deny the motion. While a magistrate’s recommendation is not binding, they are often adopted by the courts. Parties have the opportunity to object to such recommendations, however, if they are unfavorable. Recently, the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York discussed the standard of review employed when evaluating objections to magistrate recommendations in a case in which it ultimately dismissed the plaintiff’s medical malpractice claims. If you sustained damages due to incompetent medical care, it is smart to meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to determine your possible claims.

The Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff, who lived in a facility operated by the federal government, sought treatment for symptoms affecting his eye. He visited a doctor who worked for the facility and underwent an examination. The doctor then prescribed the plaintiff medication. The drug caused severe harm to the plaintiff’s eye.

It is alleged that the doctor also failed to treat the plaintiff’s subsequent harm in a timely manner. Thus, he filed a lawsuit against the federal government, alleging the doctor’s failure to warn the plaintiff of the potential risks associated with the medication and the failure to provide prompt treatment for his resulting harm constituted medical malpractice. Following discovery, the government moved for summary judgment. The motion was reviewed by a magistrate judge, who issued a report and recommendation that the court grant the motion. The plaintiff then objected. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Draws Distinction Between Medical Malpractice and Medical Negligence

Published on: September 14, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

In New York, the terms medical malpractice and medical negligence are often used interchangeably. While they have similar meanings, there are differences between the two, and they impose distinctive burdens of proof on plaintiffs asserting them as causes of action. The was demonstrated in a recent opinion issued by a New York court in a case arising out of primary care malpractice. If you suffered harm due to the careless acts of your physician, it is important to understand what evidence you must produce to recover damages, and you should speak to a Syracuse primary care malpractice lawyer about your rights.

The Decedent’s Harm

It is reported that the decedent was living in a state-owned facility. He visited the infirmary with complaints of chest pain that radiated down his arm lasting two hours. The nurse at the infirmary attempted to conduct an EKG, but the machine used to perform the test was inoperable. She then contacted the defendant medical center to perform telehealth services for the decedent. The attending physician’s assistant contemplated ordering an EKG but did not because the decedent’s vital signs were normal.

Allegedly, after the telehealth consultation ended, the nurse gave the decedent medication, and he returned to his room. He returned to the infirmary a second time, at which point the EKG machine was working. An EKG revealed he was having a heart attack, and he was transferred to a hospital. He subsequently filed a lawsuit against the state, alleging, among other things, medical negligence. The state moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims via summary judgment, but the court found that there was a genuine factual dispute as to whether the state deviated from the accepted standard of care. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Federal Jurisdiction Over Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: September 10, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

It is well-established that people harmed by medical malpractice have the right to seek compensation from the parties responsible for their injuries. While it is not required for a plaintiff in a medical malpractice case to be represented by an attorney, it is prudent, as most people outside of the legal arena do not understand the requirements imposed by procedural rules and are likely to make mistakes that can adversely impact their claims. This was illustrated in a recent ruling in which a New York court dismissed a plaintiff’s claims seeking damages for medical malpractice due to lack of jurisdiction over the matter. If you were hurt by negligent medical care, you could be owed damages, and you should engage the services of a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to aid you in pursuing your claims.

Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit in federal court against the state, asserting numerous claims, including medical malpractice. She filed the complaint without the assistance of an attorney. The precise nature of the medical treatment she received and the harm that arose from such care was not disclosed in the court’s opinion. She moved to proceed in forma pauperis; as such, the court conducted its two-part analysis, first determining if she qualified for in forma pauperis status and then screening her complaint to evaluate if it was within the court’s jurisdiction.

It is alleged that while the court granted her motion to proceed in forma pauperis, it found that the complaint did not provide grounds for federal jurisdiction. It provided the plaintiff leave to amend her complaint, which she did. The court determined her amended complaint to be devoid of grounds for jurisdiction as well and subsequently dismissed her claims. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Explains Grounds for Setting Aside a Jury’s Verdict in a Medical Malpractice Case

Published on: September 10, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

In medical malpractice cases, the task of evaluating a plaintiff’s damages is usually assigned to the jury. While assessing the cost of past and future medical care is a relatively straightforward task, determining the value of the suffering and pain endured by the plaintiff is not a clear-cut process. As such, the jury may issue a verdict that does not align with the evidence produced at trial. In such instances, either party can move to set the verdict aside, but establishing that a jury’s damages award is inappropriate can prove difficult. Recently, a New York court discussed the standards used in evaluating whether a verdict should be vacated in an opinion issued in a nursing malpractice case. If you were injured due to negligent nursing care, you could be owed damages, and it is in your best interest to meet with a Syracuse nursing malpractice lawyer to discuss your options.

The Decedent’s Harm

It is reported that the decedent was receiving care in a long-term nursing facility when he choked on a piece of food. He subsequently suffered a heart attack, lapsed into a coma, and died several weeks later. The plaintiff, the representative of the decedent’s estate, filed a malpractice lawsuit against the defendant facility. The complaint alleged that the nurse that performed CPR on the decedent failed to check his airway for an obstruction, which constituted a departure from the standard of care.

Allegedly, the complaint further asserted that the nurse’s breach of the standard was a substantial factor in bringing about the decedent’s harm. The case proceeded to trial, and the jury issued a verdict granting the plaintiff $300,000 for the decedent’s conscious pain and suffering. The plaintiff then moved to set aside the verdict on the issue of damages as against the weight of the evidence. The court denied the motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Federal Jurisdiction Over Medical Malpractice Claims

Published on: August 28, 2021 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

In many instances, parties that suffer harm due to medical negligence will sustain other damages as well, such as losses caused by violations of their civil rights. Thus, they will often choose to pursue claims for damages in federal court. While federal courts can exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims in certain circumstances, if the basis for such jurisdiction is removed, the courts will typically decline to exercise jurisdiction over such claims. This was demonstrated in a ruling recently issued in a New York case in a matter arising out of physical therapy malpractice. If you sustained injuries due to the negligence of a physical therapist, it is smart to speak to a skillful Syracuse physical therapy malpractice lawyer regarding your potential claims.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the plaintiff, who is a paraplegic, underwent a physical therapy session with the defendant. During the session, the defendant placed a hot pack on the plaintiff’s lower back and advised him to leave it there. The plaintiff subsequently suffered second-degree burns, which he alleged caused emotional trauma and mental distress in addition to physical pain. He filed a lawsuit against the defendant, asserting medical malpractice claims as well as claims arising under federal law. The defendant moved to have the plaintiff’s claims dismissed in their entirety. The court ultimately ruled in favor of the defendant and dismissed the plaintiff’s claims.

Supplemental Jurisdiction Over State Law Claims Filed in Federal Court

The court concluded that the plaintiff failed to assert viable federal claims. Thus, it dismissed the counts in his complaint that arose under federal law. The court also declined to exercise jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s medical malpractice claim, which arose under state law, unless the plaintiff was able to amend his complaint to assert a viable federal claim. Continue Reading ›