Rochester Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Questions surrounding a litigant’s mental capacity can significantly affect how a civil case proceeds, particularly in complex medical malpractice disputes. Courts must balance the protection of potentially impaired parties with the preservation of their autonomy and due process rights. A recent New  York ruling highlights how courts approach requests for competency determinations, appointment of a representative, and attorney disqualification in ongoing litigation. If you or a loved one were harmed by incompetent medical care, it is wise to consider speaking with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to understand how these issues may affect your or your loved one’s claims.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the plaintiff sought remote medical treatment from a physician affiliated with the defendant healthcare entity and received overlapping prescriptions for weight loss medications over an extended period, resulting in neurological symptoms and alleged permanent injuries.  The plaintiff later entered into a separation agreement with their employer, which included provisions releasing certain claims.

Reportedly, the plaintiffs commenced an action asserting claims for medical malpractice, lack of informed consent, negligent hiring, and loss of consortium. The defendant moved for summary judgment based on contractual release provisions, while the plaintiffs opposed the motion by arguing that the plaintiff lacked the mental capacity to enter into the agreement, leading the court to deny summary judgment and allow the claims to proceed. Continue Reading ›

Medical malpractice claims arising from nursing home care during the COVID-19 pandemic continue to test the boundaries between provider accountability and statutory immunity. Families who lost loved ones in long-term care facilities have pursued claims alleging negligent infection control, inadequate staffing, and failures to follow public health guidance. At the same time, healthcare facilities have relied on emergency legislation enacted during the pandemic to shield themselves from civil liability. A recent New York trial decision addressed whether a nursing home was entitled to dismissal of malpractice and wrongful death claims based on pandemic-related immunity. If you have concerns about harm caused by negligent nursing home care, you should consider consulting with a Rochester medical malpractice attorney to understand how these legal protections may affect your rights.

Case Setting

It is reported that the decedent was admitted to a New York City nursing home for short-term subacute rehabilitation following a hospitalization for a fall and altered mental status. The facility qualified as a nursing home under New York Public Health Law and provided residential medical care and rehabilitation services. During the decedent’s residency, the COVID-19 pandemic was ongoing, and the facility experienced multiple infections among residents and staff.

Allegedly, the decedent contracted COVID-19 while residing at the facility and later died from complications associated with the virus. The plaintiff alleged that the facility had a history of regulatory violations and failed to implement adequate infection control measures both before and during the pandemic. The claims asserted that deficiencies in policies, staffing, screening, isolation procedures, and overall preparedness contributed to the decedent’s infection and death. Continue Reading ›

Continue Reading ›

Continue Reading ›

Patients trust medical facilities to follow accepted standards of care, maintain appropriate staffing levels, and protect them from avoidable harm during hospitalization. When that trust is breached, the resulting injuries can be substantial. A recent decision from a New York court sheds light on the types of discovery a plaintiff may obtain when alleging that inadequate staffing contributed to a serious hospital-acquired injury. If you or a loved one suffered harm while admitted to a hospital, you should talk to a Rochester medical malpractice attorney who can help you understand what evidence may be available to support your claim.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff was admitted to the defendant’s hospital for roughly 20 days in November 2017, during which time he allegedly developed a significant pressure ulcer on his lower back. The plaintiff asserted that the defendant failed to conduct a complete physical examination, did not implement adequate preventive measures, and failed to properly monitor his condition, leading to the development of the ulcer. These shortcomings occurred while the plaintiff was treated in the intensive care unit.

Allegedly, during discovery, the plaintiff demanded disclosure of the defendant’s staffing plan, staffing schedule, and attendance records for all employees assigned to the intensive care unit during the month in question. The defendant objected, asserting that the request was vague, overly burdensome, and irrelevant because the plaintiff’s initial bill of particulars did not allege negligent staffing. The plaintiff subsequently served an amended bill of particulars, adding allegations that the defendant failed to properly hire, staff, train, educate, supervise, and monitor the individuals responsible for his care. Continue Reading ›

Patients place immense trust in their surgeons to perform operations safely and to promptly identify complications when they arise. When this trust is breached, the resulting harm can be catastrophic. A recent decision from a New York court demonstrates that where qualified medical experts disagree over whether a surgeon’s actions met accepted medical standards, such disputes are properly left to a jury. If you or a loved one has suffered harm after surgery, it is essential to consult with a Rochester medical malpractice attorney to understand your rights.

Facts and Procedural Background

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent a laparoscopic sigmoidectomy, a surgery to remove part of the colon, at a New York City hospital operated by the defendant public health corporation. Allegedly, prior testing had revealed a likely malignant mass obstructing the plaintiff’s sigmoid colon, prompting the surgical procedure. The surgery, performed by a staff surgeon, included a loop ileostomy to divert bowel contents through an abdominal port. During the operation, the surgeon discovered an “incomplete donut,” meaning that the circular tissue ring from the surgical stapler did not form a complete circle, potentially indicating a defect at the connection site between the two bowel ends.

Allegedly, the surgeon performed an air leak test to ensure that the surgical connection between bowel segments was intact, and when no leak was detected, the procedure was completed. Postoperatively, the plaintiff experienced hypotension and cardiac complications and was soon diagnosed with septic shock. A second surgery performed two days later revealed a partially necrotic and leaking anastomosis, which was resected and revised. The plaintiff remained intubated for an extended period, developed encephalopathy, and was ultimately discharged to a rehabilitation facility months later. Continue Reading ›

Patients trust their surgeons to perform procedures with precision and to recognize any complications that arise afterward. When that trust is broken, the results can be devastating. A recent decision from a New York court highlights how disputes over expert testimony and surgical standards often determine whether a malpractice case proceeds to trial. The case illustrates that even when a complication is a known surgical risk, physicians may still be held accountable if they fail to meet the accepted standard of care. If you or someone you love has suffered harm following a surgical procedure, you should speak with a Rochester medical malpractice attorney experienced in handling complex surgical injury claims to learn about your legal rights and options.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent a Cesarean section performed by the defendants at a hospital operated by one of the defendant medical entities. During the course of the surgery, the plaintiff sustained a bowel perforation, a serious complication that, while recognized as a potential risk of Cesarean delivery, can cause severe and lasting harm if not promptly diagnosed and treated. It is alleged that after the surgery, the plaintiff began to experience nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and an elevated heart rate within two days of the procedure. These symptoms were indicative of a bowel perforation, yet the defendants failed to recognize the severity of her condition, delaying necessary treatment.

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 ›