Articles Posted in Hospital Malpractice

Expert testimony is a key component in New York medical malpractice cases. Specifically, it is generally necessary to establish the standard of care and the manners in which the defendant diverged from the standard. As discussed in a recent New York opinion issued in a medical malpractice case, if a plaintiff fails to submit an expert report adequate to demonstrate such departures, their claim may be dismissed. If you were hurt by insufficient medical care, it is wise to confer with a Rochester medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

Case Setting

It is reported that the decedent had a history of hypertension, diabetes, and other conditions and was under the care of his primary physician since 2007. In April 2014, the decedent treated with the primary care physician for complaints of headache and sinus pain; the physician diagnosed him with a sinus infection. Following the visit to the primary physician, the decedent collapsed at home, and after being taken to the hospital, he was diagnosed with an intracerebral brain hemorrhage. Despite being transferred to another hospital, the decedent later passed away.

Allegedly, the plaintiffs brought a medical malpractice and wrongful death claim against three defendants: the decedent’s primary care physician, his medical practice, and a hospital. The plaintiffs asserted that the physician misdiagnosed the decedent, treating him for a sinus infection rather than a precursor to a brain hemorrhage, which resulted in the decedent’s subsequent death. The plaintiffs argued that the hospital also negligently delayed diagnosing the brain hemorrhage, which worsened the decedent’s condition. The decedent had complained of headaches and sinus pain but denied other serious symptoms. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that the treatment provided met the standard of care and that there were no indications warranting a referral for a CT scan or further neurological assessment. The trial court denied these motions, prompting the defendants to appeal. Continue Reading ›

Healthcare providers who recklessly cause their patients harm are often reluctant to concede their liability. Additionally, in some cases, they may go so far as to attempt to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims prior to trial. If the evidence demonstrates a disputed issue of fact, though, the plaintiff should be able to pursue their claims, as demonstrated in a recent New York ruling. If you sustained injuries because of inadequate medical care, it is smart to meet with a Rochester medical malpractice attorney regarding your options.

Facts of the Case and Procedural History

It it reported that the plaintiff, who was admitted to the defendant hospital on July 1, 2012, one week past her due date. Various medical interventions were employed to induce labor, including the use of Cervidil, a Cook’s cervical balloon, and Pitocin. Throughout the labor process, the plaintiff experienced complications, including recurrent decelerations in the fetal heart rate. Despite repeated requests for a Cesarean section, the defendant doctor attempted a vacuum extraction, which was unsuccessful. An emergency C-section was eventually performed, but the child was born in serious condition, requiring resuscitation and intensive care. The child died eight days later due to perinatal anoxic/ischemic encephalopathy.

Allegedly, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit individually and as the administrator of her child’s estate, asserting claims for medical malpractice and lack of informed consent. The trial court denied the defendant hospital’s motion for summary judgment and denied the defendant doctor’s motion for partial summary judgment regarding the lack of informed consent claim. The defendants appealed. Continue Reading ›

In treatment settings, a patient will receive care from multiple providers. As such, if the patient subsequently suffers injuries due to the treatment provided, they will seek damages from everyone doctor that contributed to their harm. In such instances, it is important to name the correct parties and pursue the claims in the appropriate jurisdiction, as demonstrated by a recent opinion issued in a New York case involving medical malpractice claims against a federal employee. If you were hurt by a careless doctor, you may be owed damages, and you should speak to a Rochester medical malpractice lawyer about your options.

Procedural and Factual History of the Case

It is alleged that in August 2021, the plaintiffs, acting as parents and natural guardians of their infant child, filed a negligence and medical malpractice suit against several defendants, including a medical doctor employed by the United States Army, who was accused of multiple errors during the delivery of the child. Later, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their claims against the doctor upon learning of his federal employment status.

It is reported that another defendant, however, filed a third-party complaint against the army doctor, seeking indemnification and contribution. The army doctor removed the third-party action to federal court and moved to substitute the United States as a party and dismiss the action, or alternatively, to stay the proceedings. Plaintiffs joined the army doctor’s motion to dismiss and remand the case back to state court, indicating they did not intend to add the army doctor or the United States as parties. Continue Reading ›

Many older and infirm patients who are admitted to the hospital for critical care are unable to move out of their beds or walk independently. In such instances, the physicians and nurses attending to the patient’s care will typically employ fall prevention measures. If they fail to do so, and a patient falls and suffers harm as a result, it may constitute medical malpractice. As demonstrated in a recent New York ruling, a defendant’s conclusory allegations that they could not have prevented a patient’s fall are inadequate to show that medical malpractice claims should be dismissed. If you or a loved one were injured due to insufficient medical care, it is prudent to speak to a Rochester medical malpractice lawyer as soon as possible.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff’s decedent was admitted to the defendant’s hospital with failure to thrive and a cough. At the time of admission, she was functionally quadriplegic and categorized as a high fall risk. Tragically, days after her admission, she was discovered on the floor of her room with a head laceration, having fallen from her bed. Subsequent tests revealed she sustained a subdural hematoma. She passed away a week later.

It is reported that the plaintiff initiated a medical malpractice action against the defendant, alleging, among other things, the inadequate assessment of the decedent’s fall risk and inadequate fall prevention measures. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a departure from the standard of care or proximate cause. Continue Reading ›

New York law dictates that people who want to pursue medical malpractice claims against their healthcare providers must do so within a specified timeframe. In addition to complying with the statute of limitations for medical malpractice claims, parties seeking compensation from a public entity must abide by the notice requirements as well. As indicated in a recent opinion issued by a New York court, the failure to adhere to such requirements may be fatal to a claim. If you were harmed by the negligence of your physician, you may be owed damages, and you should meet with a Rochester medical malpractice lawyer as soon as possible.

Background of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a petition for leave to file late notice of claim against the defendant. The claim sounded in medical malpractice and arose out of the treatment the plaintiff received at a facility operated by the defendant, a public corporation. The trial court denied the plaintiff’s petition for leave, and the plaintiff appealed.

New York Law Regarding Notice in Medical Malpractice Claims

On appeal, the court found that the trial court wisely exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiff’s petition for leave to file late notice of claim and affirmed the trial court ruling. Pursuant to New York’s General Municipal Law 50-e, a party that wishes to pursue a medical malpractice claim against a public corporation must provide the corporation with notice of the claim within ninety days of when the claim accrued or within a reasonable time after. If they neglect to offer such notice, their claim may be dismissed. Continue Reading ›

Parties in medical malpractice cases typically ask juries to weigh the evidence presented at trial and issue a verdict based on that evidence. Parties do not always agree with the jury’s reasoning, though, and if they believe that the jury ruled improvidently, they can ask the court to set aside the verdict. As explained in a recent opinion delivered in a New York medical malpractice case, however, the court will only vacate a jury’s verdict if it is clear that it does not comply with the evidence presented. If you suffered losses due to negligent care rendered by a medical professional, it is smart to meet with a Rochester medical malpractice lawyer to assess your options for seeking damages.

Background of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff was admitted to the defendant hospital in 2009. A CT scan of the chest showed a large mass, and a biopsy confirmed that it was lymphoma. She subsequently began chemotherapy treatment through a mediport in her chest. During the administration of the chemotherapy, she complained of burning, and the treatment was discontinued.

Reportedly, it was later found that the needle had become displaced, causing the medication to infuse into the tissue surrounding the mediport and injuring the plaintiff. The plaintiff later filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant. A trial was held, which resulted in a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff and an award of damages for suffering and pain. The defendant filed a motion asking the court to set aside the verdict. The court denied the defendant’s motion, and the defendant appealed. Continue Reading ›

Under New York law, there are different statutes of limitations for pursuing negligence and medical malpractice actions. While such claims are similar, there are key differences between them, and if a party seeking damages for harm caused by a medical professional fails to properly characterize their claims, they may unintentionally waive their right to recover compensation. This was demonstrated in a recent New York opinion in which the court dismissed the plaintiff’s claims, finding that they were barred by the two-and-a-half-year statute of limitations that applies to medical malpractice actions. If you suffered harm due to the negligence of a doctor, it is important to confer with a Rochester medical malpractice attorney promptly to protect your rights.

Factual and Procedural Background of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent received medical care at the defendant hospital in September 2015 for unspecified health concerns. He died two weeks into his hospital admission. Approximately three years later, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant asserting wrongful death and medical malpractice claims. The defendant then moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s medical malpractice claim on the grounds it was barred by the two-and-a-half-year statute of limitations. The plaintiff opposed the motion, arguing that her claims sounded in negligence and not medical malpractice. The court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appealed.

Differences Between Negligence and Medical Malpractice Claims

On appeal, the court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claim. In doing so, the court discussed the nuances between negligence and medical malpractice claims. The court noted that the distinction is subtle, and no sharp line divides the two. Rather, whether a claim sounds in medical malpractice or ordinary negligence turns on whether the behavior complained of involves an art or matter of medical science requiring special skills not typically possessed by lay people or whether the acts or omissions complained of could be evaluated on the basis of the common experience of the judge or jury. Continue Reading ›