Medical malpractice cases in New York are often won or lost on the strength of expert testimony. A recent New York ruling in which the court affirmed the dismissal of a malpractice and lack of informed consent case after the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to the defendants’ expert-supported summary judgment motion, highlights the uphill battle plaintiffs face when they cannot meaningfully rebut defense expert evidence with their own. If you suffered harm due to surgical complications or believe you were not fully informed about the risks of a procedure, it is smart to talk to a knowledgeable Rochester medical malpractice attorney about your options.
Case Overview
Reportedly, the plaintiff underwent spinal surgery in October 2013. The procedure involved an extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF), performed by Dr. Mitchell Levine, a neurosurgeon, and a thoracotomy, performed by Dr. Laurence Spier, a thoracic surgeon. Both doctors were affiliated with North Shore University Hospital and Northwell Health. The plaintiff later alleged that the surgeries were negligently performed and initiated a lawsuit asserting lack of informed consent and medical malpractice claims.
It is alleged that the defendants moved for summary judgment, presenting affirmations from board-certified experts in neurosurgery and thoracic surgery. These experts attested that the procedures were conducted within the bounds of accepted medical practice and that the plaintiff’s complications did not result from any deviation from standard care. They further asserted that the plaintiff was adequately informed of the risks and alternatives prior to surgery.