Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog

New York Court Explains COVID-19 Medical Malpractice Immunity

Published on: August 12, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

The COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for healthcare providers, including nursing homes and rehabilitation centers. Families who lost loved ones in these settings often sought accountability through medical malpractice or wrongful death claims. Yet New York law temporarily granted broad immunity to healthcare facilities under the Emergency or Disaster Treatment Protection Act (EDTPA), shielding them from many civil suits arising from pandemic-related care. While the pandemic has ended, this statutory immunity continues to influence litigation, as demonstrated by a recent New York ruling. If your loved one suffered harm in a healthcare facility, it is important to consult with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to understand the laws that may affect your rights.

Case Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff, acting as proposed administrator of his mother’s estate, commenced an action against a nursing home where the decedent resided before her passing. The plaintiff alleged that the decedent contracted COVID-19 while living at the facility and subsequently died in April 2020. The plaintiff asserted causes of action for negligence, gross negligence, and wrongful death, alleging that the facility failed to protect the decedent from exposure to the virus. The complaint sought damages on behalf of the estate, contending that the nursing home’s care fell below acceptable standards during the pandemic.

Allegedly, the defendant nursing home moved to dismiss the complaint under CPLR 3211(a), arguing that it was immune from liability pursuant to the EDTPA. The statute, enacted in April 2020, provided health care facilities with immunity from civil and criminal liability for harm arising from acts or omissions in the course of providing services during the COVID-19 emergency, so long as certain conditions were met. The defendant asserted that all care provided to the decedent was rendered in compliance with emergency rules, in response to the outbreak, and in good faith. The trial court denied the defendant’s motion, concluding that dismissal was not warranted at the pleading stage. The defendant appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Procedural Considerations in Slip and Fall Cases

Published on: August 6, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

While accidents frequently happen in businesses or social establishments, not every fall or injury creates a basis for legal recovery. In premises liability cases, New York courts require proof of a dangerous condition and evidence that the landowner either created or knew about the defect. A recent decision issued in a slip and fall case in New York illustrates how the courts review the sufficiency of evidence and compliance with discovery rules when evaluating whether a case should proceed to trial. If you have been injured in a fall or another incident on unsafe property, it is critical to consult with a Syracuse personal injury attorney about your rights and remedies.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff commenced an action in 2015, seeking damages for personal injuries she allegedly sustained after falling at approximately 11:45 p.m. while attempting to enter a bar through its rear doorway. The bar was owned by the defendant bar owners, while the premises themselves were owned by the defendant property owner, who leased the space to the bar.

It is further reported that the plaintiff alleged she lost her balance and fell while stepping on a “steep ramp” at the threshold of the doorway. She contended that the condition of the ramp created a hazardous entranceway, which caused her accident. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that the threshold did not constitute a dangerous or defective condition and that the plaintiff could not establish liability without resorting to speculation. They submitted photographs of the entranceway and an expert report stating that no unsafe condition existed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Examines Liability in Chain Reaction Collisions

Published on: July 29, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Rear-end collisions are among the most straightforward traffic cases in New York law, as it is often presumed that the rear driver is at fault. Nonetheless, such cases can still be complicated, as demonstrated in a recent New York opinion issued in a case involving a chain-reaction collision. If you were hurt in a multi-vehicle accident, you may be owed damages, and you should speak to a Syracuse car accident attorney as soon as possible.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff was involved in a chain-reaction collision during morning rush hour while driving in stop-and-go traffic on a wet and drizzly roadway. According to the plaintiff, her vehicle was fully stopped when it was struck from behind after the defendant, the rear-most driver in the chain, collided with a middle vehicle, which was then pushed into the plaintiff’s car. The plaintiff brought a personal injury lawsuit against the defendant, alleging that the defendant’s negligent operation of her vehicle caused the crash and her resulting injuries.

It is alleged that at trial, the plaintiff rested her case before the defendant had presented any evidence and then moved for a directed verdict on the issue of liability. The trial court denied the motion as premature. The jury ultimately ruled in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff then filed a post-trial motion under CPLR 4404 seeking judgment notwithstanding the verdict or, in the alternative, a new trial. The trial court denied the motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Examines When a Delayed Diagnosis Constitutes Malpractice

Published on: July 26, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In medical malpractice litigation, plaintiffs must not only allege negligence but also present competent evidence linking that negligence to a patient’s injury. This requirement is particularly important in delayed diagnosis cases, where causation hinges on whether earlier intervention would have changed the outcome. A recent decision from a New York court illustrates how courts evaluate these issues at the summary judgment stage. If you suspect a delay in diagnosis or treatment has harmed your health, you should meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney who can help you assess your legal options.

Case Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff sought treatment at a private OB/GYN practice in 2017 after noticing a lump in her left breast. The defendant physician, affiliated with the practice, examined the plaintiff and referred her for diagnostic imaging. A mammogram and sonogram were performed and reportedly interpreted as showing no evidence of malignancy. The plaintiff was advised to return in six months for follow-up testing.

It is alleged that the plaintiff returned in early 2018 and was again referred for imaging. This time, the results raised concerns for possible malignancy. A biopsy was ordered, and the plaintiff was ultimately diagnosed with Stage II breast cancer. She underwent chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation. The plaintiff filed suit against the OB/GYN physician and practice, alleging that their failure to properly assess and respond to her initial complaints resulted in a delayed diagnosis and worsened prognosis. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Addresses Conflicting Expert Reports in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: June 11, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Medical malpractice cases often turn on whether a provider responded appropriately to a patient’s symptoms during postoperative care. Under New York law, healthcare professionals must adhere to accepted medical standards when evaluating signs of complications, including potential infections. As such, conflicting expert opinions on the standards of care can prevent the early dismissal of a claim, as shown in a recent New York opinion issued in a medical malpractice case. If you have suffered harm due to inadequate medical treatment, you should speak with a skilled Syracuse medical malpractice attorney about your rights.

The Case Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent arthroscopic surgery on his right knee in March 2016 to correct an internal knee derangement. Following the surgery, the plaintiff received physical therapy at the defendant healthcare provider’s office and was treated by the individual defendant provider between March and August 2016. The plaintiff continued to experience pain and swelling in the affected leg over the course of several months.

It is alleged that by May 2017, the plaintiff’s symptoms had worsened, and he presented to a hospital with pain and swelling in the same leg. There, he was diagnosed with osteomyelitis, a serious bone infection. Treatment of the condition ultimately required a bone graft, among other interventions. The plaintiff then instituted a medical malpractice case against the providers responsible for his postoperative care, asserting that they negligently failed to evaluate and treat signs of infection, which caused or contributed to his injuries. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Addresses Obstructed Crosswalk Signal in Wrongful Death Case

Published on: June 6, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In pedestrian accident cases, courts often examine whether environmental conditions played a role in the incident. One significant factor is the visibility of traffic control signals. New York law imposes a nondelegable duty on municipalities to maintain roadways, including ensuring that traffic signals are not obscured by foliage or other obstructions, and if they fail to do so, they may be held accountable, as demonstrated in a recent New York ruling. If you lost a loved one in a pedestrian collision involving dangerous road conditions, it is important to speak with a qualified Syracuse wrongful death attorney about your options for recovery.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff, acting on behalf of the decedent’s estate, filed a wrongful death action against the defendants, including a municipal entity and a contractor responsible for maintaining trees at the site of a fatal collision. The incident occurred while the decedent was lawfully crossing a street within a marked crosswalk when she was struck and killed by a speeding vehicle.

It is alleged that at the time of the accident, foliage partially obscured the pedestrian signal at the crosswalk where the collision took place. The plaintiff claimed that the obstruction prevented the decedent and other pedestrians from clearly seeing whether it was safe to cross, and further asserted that the obstruction was a contributing factor in the fatal event. The defendants moved for summary judgment, seeking dismissal of the complaint. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Examines Comparative Negligence in Car Accident Cases

Published on: May 29, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In motor vehicle accident cases, establishing which driver had the right-of-way is often key to determining liability. Under New York law, a driver who proceeds through an intersection with a green light is generally entitled to assume that other motorists will obey traffic signals. A recent New York decision in which the court ruled in favor of a plaintiff who had the right-of-way and rejected the defendants’ attempt to assign partial fault to her illustrates how courts apply this principle to resolve questions of comparative negligence. If you or someone you love were injured in a car crash, you should speak with a skilled Syracuse personal injury attorney about your rights.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff driver and her husband brought a personal injury lawsuit against the defendants following a car accident in Brooklyn. The incident occurred in May 2021 when a vehicle operated by the defendant struck the plaintiff’s car as she traveled through an intersection. The plaintiffs claimed the defendant driver failed to yield and entered the intersection against a red light.

It is alleged that the plaintiff was proceeding lawfully through the intersection with a green traffic signal when the collision occurred. The plaintiffs sought damages for physical injuries and loss of consortium. In response, the defendants raised the affirmative defense of comparative negligence, arguing that the plaintiff driver bore some responsibility for the crash. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Amendments in Medical Malpractice Claims

Published on: May 23, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In medical malpractice litigation, clarity and timeliness in stating claims are essential. Once a case has progressed past the discovery phase and has been certified as ready for trial, courts are reluctant to allow major changes to a plaintiff’s theory of the case, as demonstrated in a recent New York case in which the court affirmed the denial of a plaintiff’s request to amend his bill of particulars years into the litigation. If you believe you were harmed by incompetent medical care, a seasoned Syracuse medical malpractice attorney can help take the steps necessary to preserve your rights.

History of the Case

It is reported that in May 2017, the plaintiff commenced a medical malpractice action against the defendants, a physician and a medical facility, alleging improper care and treatment. A note of issue, signifying the close of discovery and readiness for trial, was filed in January 2021.

It is alleged that several months later, the defendant physician moved for summary judgment, asserting that the care provided complied with accepted medical standards. The second defendant subsequently filed a similar motion. Rather than respond to these motions in the usual course, the plaintiff cross-moved in May 2022 for leave to amend the bill of particulars as to both defendants. The proposed amendments sought to modify and expand upon the allegations of negligence. The trial court denied both of the plaintiff’s cross-motions to amend, citing their untimeliness. The plaintiff appealed both rulings. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Examines Summary Judgment in Truck Accident Cases

Published on: April 13, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

When large commercial vehicles shed parts while in motion, nearby motorists can suffer serious injuries. These incidents often raise questions about vehicle maintenance, driver oversight, and liability. However, when the underlying facts are disputed, courts are often reluctant to decide the case before full discovery and trial. A recent New York decision highlights the difficulty of resolving negligence claims on a motion for summary judgment where critical factual disputes remain unresolved. If you were injured in a collision with a commercial vehicle, a Syracuse personal injury attorney can assess whether you may be entitled to compensation.

Case Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff was driving along North Conduit Avenue in New York when she allegedly felt a loud impact on the driver’s side of her vehicle. The plaintiff claimed that a piece of tire tread from a nearby commercial truck detached while the truck was moving and struck her car, causing her to suffer serious injuries. The truck was reportedly owned by the defendant company and operated by a driver who was later identified.

New York Court Discusses Medical Malpractice Claims Against the Government

Published on: April 7, 2025 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Mental health treatment involves delicate clinical decisions, especially when a patient is at risk of self-harm. When a patient dies by suicide shortly after receiving psychiatric care, surviving family members may pursue legal action if they believe the care provided was inadequate. These cases are emotionally complex and legally challenging, particularly when government-employed professionals provide the care in question. A recent ruling from a New York court highlights how difficult it can be to succeed in a malpractice claim arising from a suicide, even where warning signs appear to have been present. If you lost a loved one due to what you suspect was negligent mental health care, a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney can help you explore your legal rights.

Background of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent had a long, intermittent history of mental health issues, including anxiety, depression, panic attacks, and suicidal thoughts. She had received treatment at the FQHC off and on over several years, with documented episodes of missed appointments, medication noncompliance, and inconsistent follow-up. In the final months before her death, she had been treated by both a social worker and a psychiatric nurse practitioner. The providers documented recurring symptoms of anxiety and depression, including reports of suicidal ideation, but they concluded that she did not exhibit signs warranting hospitalization.

It is reported that the decedent’s providers used a standardized assessment tool to evaluate her suicide risk and implemented safety plans in accordance with best practices. At her final visit on the day of her death, the decedent reportedly denied having suicidal intent or a plan, and the social worker determined that her condition was stable. Despite this, the decedent died by suicide within hours of leaving the facility. Continue Reading ›