Close
Serving Clients Throughout Upstate New York with Multiple Convenient Locations Syracuse | Oneida | Watertown | New Hartford | Binghamton | Cortland | Rochester | Oswego | Albany | Buffalo
Updated:

New York Court Discusses Grounds for Dismissal of Informed Consent Claims

Most surgical procedures involve some degree of risk, and the potential for harm can be elevated if the patient suffers from underlying health conditions. As such, it is a doctor’s duty to advise a patient of the possible adverse outcomes of a procedure before proceeding. If a physician fails to do so, it can lead to fatal complications. As discussed in a recent New York ruling, however, not all injuries that arise following a procedure are the result of negligence. If you were harmed by a physician’s failure to obtain your informed consent, it is advisable to speak to a Rochester medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

History of the Case

It is alleged that in October 2013, the decedent, who had a significant history of alcohol abuse, sought treatment from the defendant ophthalmologist due to vision issues. The ophthalmologist diagnosed cataracts in both eyes and recommended two separate surgeries for their removal. However, the ophthalmologist required the decedent to obtain medical clearance before proceeding. The decedent visited his primary care physician, who discovered that he suffered from atrial fibrillation and referred him to the defendant cardiologist for further evaluation. The cardiologist prescribed medications, including Metoprolol and aspirin, but did not prescribe anticoagulation medication due to the decedent’s alcohol abuse and medically cleared the decedent for surgery.

It is reported that the first cataract surgery on the left eye was performed in November 2013 without incident. The second surgery, performed on the right eye in December 2013, took place at a medical facility. After the second surgery, the decedent exhibited signs of right-sided weakness while in the post-anesthesia care unit. He was diagnosed with a stroke and transferred to another hospital, where it was confirmed that he had a left middle cerebral artery infarct. He was later moved to a nursing home and remained there until his death in September 2018. In 2016, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit asserting medical malpractice and lack of informed consent claims, alleging that the defendants committed malpractice by failing to account for the decedent’s atrial fibrillation before approving and conducting the cataract surgeries. The defendants moved for summary judgment, and the trial court granted the motions. The plaintiff appealed.

Grounds for Dismissal of Medical Malpractice and Informed Consent Claims

On appeal, the court reviewed whether the defendants were entitled to summary judgment on both the medical malpractice and lack of informed consent claims. The court reiterated that in medical malpractice cases, defendants must establish that they did not deviate from the accepted standard of care or, if they did, that such deviation was not the proximate cause of the injury.

In this case, the defendants submitted expert testimony showing that the decedent’s stroke was not a foreseeable risk of cataract surgery and that the medical treatment provided, including the use of aspirin, was appropriate given the decedent’s medical history, including alcohol abuse. The plaintiff’s expert opinions were deemed speculative and failed to adequately address the specific claims made by the defendants’ experts, including that anticoagulation was contraindicated due to alcohol abuse.

Regarding the lack of informed consent claim, the court explained that to succeed, the plaintiff needed to prove that the defendants did not properly disclose the risks associated with the procedure, that a reasonably prudent patient would not have undergone surgery if fully informed, and that the lack of informed consent caused the injury. The defendants demonstrated that the decedent had signed a consent form and was informed of the risks. The plaintiff’s experts did not sufficiently challenge this evidence.

The court also held that the Noseworthy doctrine, which allows for a lower burden of proof in cases where the injured party cannot testify, did not apply because there was no evidence that the decedent’s testimony would have been relevant to the claims.

Consequently, the appellate court affirmed the lower court’s decision, dismissing both the medical malpractice and lack of informed consent claims.

Meet with an Experienced Rochester Medical Malpractice Lawyer

If you were hurt by a careless doctor, you may be owed damages, and you should meet with an attorney. The experienced Rochester medical malpractice attorneys of DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers can assess your harm and aid you in seeking any damages available. You can reach us by calling 833-200-2000 or filling out our online form to arrange a conference.

Contact Us
Start Chat