Rochester Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

New York Court Examines Medical Malpractice Claims Arising Out of Fertility Treatment

Published on: September 11, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Patients who undergo fertility treatment place tremendous trust in their providers to safeguard their reproductive material. When mistakes occur in the storage or handling of such material, the consequences can be profound, leaving patients not only without the opportunity to conceive but also with complex legal battles. A recent decision from a New York court highlights how courts assess negligence and related claims when frozen oocytes are allegedly mishandled. If you or a loved one has suffered harm connected to fertility treatment, it is crucial to consult with a Rochester medical malpractice attorney experienced in handling such cases to understand your rights.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent an egg retrieval procedure in 2014, during which eighteen oocytes were collected. Sixteen were frozen for future use, while two were discarded as nonviable. The frozen oocytes were initially stored at one facility and later transferred to another clinic’s custody in 2016.

Allegedly, during a visit to the new facility, the plaintiff observed that her oocytes were left outside of cryogenic storage tanks for a period of time, causing her concern about their viability. The plaintiff reported her concerns to the facility’s owner, who assured her that an investigation would take place, but no follow-up occurred. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Res Judicata in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: September 4, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Patients place enormous trust in hospitals and physicians to provide safe, attentive, and competent care. When mistakes occur, the consequences can be devastating for families, and legal action may be the only way to seek accountability. Yet, even strong claims can be lost when procedural hurdles, such as prior dismissals, prevent a court from reaching the merits of a case. A recent decision from a New York court illustrates how the doctrine of res judicata can bar medical malpractice claims, underscoring the importance of careful legal strategy from the outset. If you or a loved one has been harmed due to negligent medical care, it is essential to consult with a Rochester medical malpractice attorney to protect your rights.

Case Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff brought a medical malpractice action against multiple defendants, including the defendant hospital, alleging negligence in the care of her newborn infant in January and February 2015. In July 2017, the plaintiff filed an action in state court, which was later removed to federal court. There, the federal court ordered voluntary dismissal without prejudice of the claims against the United States to allow the plaintiff to complete the administrative exhaustion process required under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

Allegedly, in February 2019, the plaintiff’s attorney moved to be relieved as counsel in both actions. The court scheduled a hearing for March 2019 that required the plaintiff’s appearance. When the plaintiff failed to appear, the state court granted counsel’s request to withdraw and dismissed the state action with prejudice. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Evidence Establishing a Lack of Informed Consent Claim

Published on: August 23, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Patients place great trust in their doctors to provide them with the information necessary to make sound decisions about medical treatment. When physicians fail to disclose material risks or alternatives, it can lead to unexpected harm and may give rise to an informed consent claim. A recent decision from a New York court highlights how courts assess motions for summary judgment in medical malpractice actions involving claims of lack of informed consent. If you or a loved one has experienced harm following a procedure, it is important to speak with a Rochester medical malpractice attorney to determine whether your rights were violated.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy performed by the defendant surgeon. Following the procedure, the plaintiff allegedly developed a common bile duct injury, requiring additional medical intervention. The plaintiff subsequently commenced an action to recover damages for medical malpractice and lack of informed consent. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant negligently performed the surgery, causing injury, and failed to provide adequate disclosure regarding the risks of the procedure, leaving her unable to make an informed decision about whether to undergo the operation.

Allegedly, the defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that the surgical care met accepted standards and that the plaintiff had been properly counseled regarding the risks of the procedure. The defendant submitted expert testimony in support of his position, asserting that bile duct injury is a known risk of the surgery and does not necessarily reflect negligence. The trial court granted the defendant’s motion, dismissing the complaint in its entirety. The plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Examines Factual Disputes in Delayed Diagnoses Cases

Published on: August 18, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Timely and accurate diagnoses are critical to patient health and recovery. In other words, when physicians fail to identify fractures or other conditions on imaging studies, patients may suffer delayed treatment, avoidable complications, and long-term harm, which may be grounds for pursuing medical malpractice claims. Demonstrating liability for a delayed diagnosis can be challenging, though, and typically requires compelling expert evidence, as illustrated by a recent New York decision. If you believe you or your child was harmed by a delayed or missed diagnosis, you should consult with a Rochester medical malpractice attorney about your rights and potential remedies.

Factual and Procedural History

It is reported that the infant plaintiff was diagnosed with osteogenesis imperfecta (OI), a genetic condition characterized by brittle bones and frequent fractures, in January 2013. Before this diagnosis, the infant’s mother commenced an action on his behalf against several physicians and medical providers. The plaintiffs stated that errors in interpreting earlier imaging studies delayed the diagnosis of OI, leading to additional injuries.

It is further reported that one defendant radiologist allegedly failed to detect a leg fracture on an X-ray taken on September 26, 2011. Another radiologist failed to identify rib fractures on a CT scan performed on February 15, 2012. The plaintiffs asserted that these oversights prevented the early recognition of OI, thereby allowing the infant plaintiff to suffer further fractures and unnecessary pain. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Analyzes Conflicting Testimony in Surgical Error Case

Published on: July 22, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

While most surgical procedures come with some degree of risk, certain complications are almost always the result of carelessness. The distinction between an unfortunate outcome and medical negligence can be difficult to determine, though, especially in cases involving complex surgical histories and multiple comorbidities. A recent ruling issued by a New York court in a medical malpractice case demonstrates how courts evaluate competing expert testimony and assess whether a malpractice claim should proceed to trial. If you have experienced serious complications following surgery, it is in your best interest to speak with a Rochester medical malpractice attorney about your rights.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent a hysterectomy at the defendant’s hospital. At the time, the plaintiff was 65 years old. Her medical history included prior abdominal surgeries and breast cancer. During the procedure, the surgeon encountered abdominal adhesions that required them to convert the surgery from laparoscopy to open surgery. During the procedure, the surgeon identified and repaired intraoperative injuries to the bladder and small bowel. Complications arose that prompted a second surgery, during which another bowel perforation was discovered and repaired. The plaintiff subsequently developed sepsis, went into cardiac arrest, and endured a prolonged hospitalization that included additional surgeries and the placement of a colostomy.

It is further reported that the plaintiff later filed a lawsuit against the hospital, asserting medical malpractice and lack of informed consent. The plaintiff alleged that the surgical team failed to adequately inspect the bowel before closing the abdomen, which allowed the third bowel injury to go unnoticed. She also asserted that inadequate preoperative counseling and documentation supported a claim for lack of informed consent. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that its providers complied with the standard of care and that the plaintiff’s injuries were unavoidable complications arising from her preexisting medical condition. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Expert Testimony in Birth Injury Case

Published on: July 7, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

When medical errors occur during labor and delivery, the consequences can be life-altering; not just for the newborn, but for the entire family. Recovering compensation can be challenging, though, as claims involving birth-related injuries often hinge on expert medical testimony. A recent decision from a New York court offers insight into how expert testimony is scrutinized under federal standards and how courts approach motions for summary judgment when causation and standard of care are in dispute. If you believe medical negligence contributed to your child’s injury at birth, you should talk to a Rochester medical malpractice attorney about your potential claims as soon as possible.

Factual Background

It is reported that the plaintiffs, a mother and her minor child, brought suit against the United States, a hospital, a health system, and two physicians, alleging that negligent medical care during labor, delivery, and neonatal treatment caused the child to suffer permanent injuries, including cerebral palsy and hemiplegia. The claims included three causes of action: negligence and/or medical malpractice, lack of informed consent, and loss of services based on the child’s anticipated inability to work.

It is alleged that the plaintiffs supported their case with expert testimony from physicians in the fields of obstetrics, anesthesiology, and pediatric neurology. These experts offered opinions connecting the alleged substandard care to the child’s neurological injuries. However, the defendants challenged the admissibility of those opinions, arguing that the plaintiffs’ experts lacked the proper qualifications or relied on speculative methods. Continue Reading ›

Court Grants Leave to File Late Notice of Claim in New York Medical Malpractice Case

Published on: June 29, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

Timeliness is a critical factor in bringing a medical malpractice claim against a public hospital in New York. Under the General Municipal Law, plaintiffs must file a notice of claim within 90 days of the alleged malpractice. However, courts may permit a late filing if specific conditions are met. A recent decision from a New York court illustrates how such requests are evaluated, particularly when actual knowledge, reasonable excuse, and prejudice are at issue. If you have questions about whether your injury may give rise to a viable claim, a Rochester medical malpractice attorney can adivse you of your rights.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff received treatment at a public hospital operated by the defendant between January 22 and February 7, 2024. She first presented to the emergency department on January 22 with abdominal and chest pain. After initial diagnostic imaging, she was discharged without surgical intervention. She returned two days later and was diagnosed with a gangrenous and perforated gallbladder. An emergency cholecystectomy was performed on January 24. The plaintiff was discharged on January 28 and returned for a follow-up on February 7.

It is alleged that in the months following her discharge, the plaintiff continued to experience significant abdominal and back pain. Nearly a year later, diagnostic imaging revealed that a remnant of her gallbladder had been left behind during the earlier surgery. On March 7, 2025, she underwent corrective surgery to remove the residual tissue. The plaintiff subsequently filed a petition for leave to serve a late notice of claim, asserting that the hospital staff negligently discharged her on January 22 and performed the initial cholecystectomy improperly. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Avoiding Dismissal of Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: June 24, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

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.

Court Examines Burden of Proof in New York Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: May 21, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

When patients suffer severe health complications in a hospital setting, questions often arise as to whether those complications could have been prevented through timely and appropriate medical intervention. While healthcare providers often move for dismissal of claims arising from such complications, if factual disputes remain about the standard of care and causation, the courts will typically rule that the case must be resolved by a jury, as demonstrated in a recent New York opinion. If you or a loved one suffered damages due to a hospital’s failure to respond to serious medical symptoms, you should speak to a Rochester medical malpractice lawyer who can help you understand your rights.

History of the Case

It is reported that the decedent presented to the emergency department of the defendant hospital on March 14, 2018, suffering from respiratory distress and displaying significant bodily edema. The hospital diagnosed the decedent with acute respiratory failure, cor pulmonale, and pulmonary hypertension with right-sided heart failure. The decedent was administered supplemental oxygen via a BiPAP machine and subsequently admitted to the hospital’s cardiac intensive care unit.

It is alleged that during the night of March 14 into the early morning of March 15, the decedent exhibited signs of physiological deterioration. The decedent was described as hypotensive, tachycardic, and hypoxic; she ultimately died. The plaintiff, acting as administrator of the decedent’s estate, filed a medical malpractice lawsuit in 2019. The claim alleged that the defendant hospital failed to timely intubate the decedent and did not adequately respond to her signs of respiratory failure. After discovery was completed, the defendant hospital moved for summary judgment, arguing that its treatment did not depart from accepted medical practice and did not proximately cause the decedent’s death. Continue Reading ›

Court Discusses Causation in New York Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: May 7, 2025 | By DeFrancisco & Falgiatano

In medical malpractice litigation, plaintiffs must not only allege that healthcare providers deviated from accepted standards of care; they must also demonstrate that such deviations directly caused the harm in question. This causation requirement often proves challenging, particularly in complex obstetric cases. A recent New York decision highlights this standard, as the court affirmed summary judgment in favor of a hospital and physician accused of negligent prenatal care following the stillbirth of a fetus. If you have suffered harm as a result of inadequate medical care during pregnancy or childbirth, an experienced Rochester medical malpractice attorney can help you determine whether you have a viable claim.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is alleged that the plaintiff received prenatal care at the defendant hospital under the supervision of the defendant physician. The plaintiff claimed that both the hospital and physician deviated from accepted standards of obstetrical care during the course of her pregnancy, ultimately resulting in the stillbirth of her child. The plaintiff commenced a lawsuit asserting medical malpractice and sought damages for the emotional and physical injuries she allegedly sustained due to this outcome.

It is reported that during the litigation, the plaintiff attempted to compel the defendants to produce certain electronically stored medical records. She also sought, in the alternative, to strike the defendants’ answers due to alleged discovery failures. In addition, the plaintiff cross-moved for leave to amend her bill of particulars to allege additional specific acts of negligence by the defendants, despite having already filed a note of issue certifying that discovery was complete. The trial court denied the plaintiff’s discovery-related motions and ultimately granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment, dismissing the complaint in its entirety. The plaintiff appealed.