Serving Clients Throughout Upstate New York with Multiple Convenient Locations

Articles Posted in Hospital Negligence

Published on:

In the context of medical malpractice claims, injured patients may not only seek compensation from the doctors and other health care providers that caused their harm but also from the hospitals or healthcare systems that employ them. As discussed in a recent New York opinion set forth in a medical malpractice case, however, corporate officers and directors of such facilities will not be deemed personally liable for the negligence of facility employees simply due to their positions. If you sustained injuries due to a careless physician, it is in your best interest to talk to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer about what claims you may be able to pursue.

Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff suffered harm following a surgical procedure at a hospital. The nature of her underlying condition and subsequent injuries were not disclosed. Regardless, she subsequently instituted a medical malpractice action in which she named the hospital where she received the allegedly negligent care that caused her harm, the doctors that provided her care, and the Chief Operating Officer of the hospital as defendants.

Allegedly, the plaintiff alleged the Chief Operating Officer was liable under a theory of respondeat superior. The Chief Operating Officer moved for the dismissal of the claims against him. The trial court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue reading

Published on:

For various reasons, people may be reluctant to hire attorneys to help them pursue medical malpractice claims. In many instances, though, the decision to proceed pro se can be fatal to their case. This was demonstrated recently when a New York federal court dismissed a plaintiff’s medical malpractice claims on the ground that there was no basis for exercising federal jurisdiction. If you were injured by incompetent medical care, you should speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to assess your options for seeking damages.

The Factual and Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant health care providers pursuant to Section 1983, which establishes causes of action for the deprivation of any privileges, rights, or immunities granted by the United States Constitution and laws. Among other things, he asserted a medical malpractice claim against the defendants. His claims arose out of the assertion that while he was confined to a state facility, he was transported to a hospital for evaluation. The defendant health care providers assessed him and treated him. He was discharged after approximately two months.

Allegedly, two days later, he complained of shortness of breath and was transported to a second hospital, where he was diagnosed with respiratory distress and bilateral pneumonia. He was transferred back to the hospital where the defendants worked, where he remained for another month. The plaintiff’s first complaint was dismissed for failure to state a claim; his second amended complaint was before the court. Continue reading

Published on:

Many hospitals and medical facilities in New York receive federal funding. If a patient suffers harm due to incompetent care received in such a facility, they can seek damages via medical malpractice claims, but they are bound by a different set of procedural requirements than those pertaining to claims against private facilities. The courts strictly construe such requirements, and if they find that a plaintiff failed to comply with them, they will most likely dismiss their claims, as demonstrated in a recent New York opinion. If you were hurt by the negligence of a medical professional, you could be owed damages, and it is smart to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer as soon as possible.

The Plaintiff’s Claims

It is reported that between June 2016 and January 2017, the plaintiff received medical treatment from the defendants, including assessments, examinations, and surgery. The plaintiff asserted that because of the defendant’s negligence and failure to obtain her informed consent, she suffered personal injuries. As such, she filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendants in state court.

Allegedly, the defendants removed the action to the federal district court pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) on the grounds that the defendants worked in a federally funded facility and were, therefore, employees of the United States and acting in the scope of their employment when they treated the plaintiff. They then moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case. Continue reading

Published on:

Emergency room doctors encounter a plethora of conditions that vary in severity throughout the course of their day. Regardless of what type of issues they are presented with, however, they have an obligation to offer treatment that complies with the standard of care. If the care they render falls outside of what is considered the accepted and good practice of medicine and causes a patient harm, it may be grounds for pursuing malpractice claims. Recently, a New York court analyzed whether a doctor’s behavior constituted malpractice in a case in which the plaintiff suffered brain injuries due to a missed diagnosis. If you were harmed by incompetent medical care, you should meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to evaluate your potential claims.

Factual Background

It is reported that the plaintiff went to the defendant’s hospital after she was experiencing difficulty speaking or thinking and seeing flashing lights for most of the day. She was assessed as a 0 on the stroke scale. The defendant emergency room doctor ordered a brain MRI regardless but discharged her before it was reviewed. The defendant radiologist, who reviewed the MRI, found no evidence of stroke upon his first review, but upon a second review found a stroke.

Allegedly, the plaintiff returned to the hospital the following morning with additional symptoms. She subsequently filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendants. The defendants moved for summary judgment at the close of discovery. The court denied the defendant radiologist’s motion but granted the defendant hospital’s and defendant doctor’s motion. The plaintiff and the defendant radiologist appealed. Continue reading

Published on:

In medical malpractice cases, the parties will usually disagree on issues like liability and damages. In such matters, the courts will generally determine that there is a factual dispute sufficient to require a trial. In other words, it is unusual for a court to rule in favor of one party as a matter of law. While summary judgment is rare in medical malpractice cases, it can occur, as demonstrated recently by a New York ruling. If you were harmed by the negligence of your doctor, you could be owed damages, and you should speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the decedent visited the defendant hospital with complaints of chest pain and shortness of breath. When he was at the hospital, he was examined by the defendant physicians. He ultimately suffered a ruptured aorta and died. The plaintiff, the administrator of the decedent’s estate, filed a lawsuit against the defendants, alleging they failed to diagnose or treat the decedent’s aortic dissection, resulting in his death. She asserted wrongful death and medical malpractice claims against them. After the completion of discovery, the plaintiff moved for judgment in her favor via summary judgment. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed.

Summary Judgment in Medical Malpractice Cases

On appeal, the court affirmed the trial court ruling. In doing so, it explained that contrary to the defendants’ assertions, the plaintiff met her burden of proving she was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Specifically, she set forth the affirmation of a medical expert who explained his qualifications and stated that, after reviewing the medical records, he determined that the defendants acted negligently and that their negligence impacted the decedent’s health. Continue reading

Published on:

Strokes are critical medical events that require immediate care. As such, doctors that fail to provide stroke patients with a prompt diagnosis and treatment may inadvertently cause them to suffer irreparable harm. People hurt by the negligent management of strokes can seek compensation for their losses, but even in cases where there seems to be clear evidence of medical malpractice, doctors are typically reluctant to admit liability; instead, they will often seek dismissal via summary judgment. Recently a New York court issued an opinion explaining the burden of proof imposed on each party with regard to motions for summary judgment in medical malpractice cases, in a matter in which it denied the defendant’s motions. If you were harmed by incompetent medical care, you might be owed damages, and you should meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to assess what evidence you must produce to prove liability.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff presented to the defendant’s hospital complaining of lightheadedness, confusion, difficulty speaking, and right-sided weakness. He reported that he recently fell off of a stool as well. He was admitted to the hospital for evaluation and care and was treated by a radiologist, hospitalist, and neurologist during his admission. He was diagnosed with a stroke the following day, after which his condition worsened greatly.

He was ultimately transferred to another hospital for more extensive neurological care. The plaintiff subsequently filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant and his treatment providers, arguing their negligence caused him to suffer significant brain damage. The defendants each filed motions for summary judgment. Continue reading

Published on:

Many health care facilities in New York are owned and operated by public corporations. A patient that sustains harm due to incompetent medical care at a hospital owned by a public corporation has the right to pursue damages via medical malpractice claims, but they must adhere to specific notice requirements. If they fail to provide the public corporation with the notice required by New York law, their claims may be dismissed, as demonstrated in a recent opinion issued by a New York Court. If you suffered injuries while receiving care at a hospital, it is prudent to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer as soon as possible to protect your right to seek compensation.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff underwent care at a hospital owned by the defendant city. The facts regarding the nature of his care were not provided, but he went on to suffer unspecified harm, which he alleged arose out of the negligence of the hospital employees. He subsequently filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant as well as an application to serve a late notice of claim or to deem the notice of claim timely filed. The trial court denied the motion, and the plaintiff appealed.

Notice in Medical Malpractice Claims Against Public Corporations

The appellate court affirmed the trial court ruling. In New York’s General Municipal Law section 50, parties allegedly harmed by the negligence of the employee of a public corporation must provide the corporation with notice of their potential claim within 90 days of the date the claim accrued. In the subject case, the court explained that even if the continuous treatment doctrine applied, the time period for filing a notice of claim would have expired in October 2019, but the plaintiff did not file his notice until September 2020. Continue reading

Published on:

The average person usually lacks an understanding of the standard of care imposed on medical professionals. As such, in most medical malpractice cases both sides will retain medical experts to explain to the judge or jury what is required under the applicable standard of care and to offer an opinion that supports their position as to whether the defendant complied with the standard. In most instances, the party that presents the most convincing expert opinion will prevail. Recently, a New York court issued an opinion highlighting the importance of expert testimony in medical malpractice cases. If you suffered harm due to the negligence of a treatment provider, you might be able to recover compensation, and you should speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent presented to the defendant’s hospital with a fever, pain, and other symptoms. He was treated with antibiotics. He subsequently developed critical issues due to the side effects of the antibiotic and later passed away. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant, asserting negligent hiring and supervision and medical malpractice claims.

Specifically, it is reported that the plaintiff argued the defendant’s physician’s negligent administration of the antibiotic and failure to monitor the decedent led to his fatal injuries. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing the plaintiff failed to demonstrate it deviated from the standard of care. The trial court granted the motion, dismissing all of the plaintiff’s claims, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue reading

Published on:

In New York medical malpractice cases, it is not uncommon for a defendant to seek dismissal prior to trial. In most instances, they will do so by filing a motion asking the court to grant summary judgment in their favor. If they meet their evidentiary burden with regards to the claims asserted in the motion, the onus then shifts to the plaintiff, who must then produce evidence that shows factual disputes exist in order to defeat the motion. If the defendant fails to meet its burden, though, the motion will be denied regardless of the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s response, as illustrated recently in an opinion issued by a New York court in an emergency room malpractice case. If you suffered harm due to the recklessness of a health care provider, it is wise to talk to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney about your rights.

Historical Background of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent visited the emergency department of the defendant medical center, where she was evaluated by the defendant doctor. She presented with complaints of a severe headache, which the defendant diagnosed as a migraine. He discharged the decedent, who followed up with her primary care physician. After a subsequent visit to the emergency department, she died of a subarachnoid hemorrhage.

Reportedly, the decedent’s estate then filed medical malpractice claims against the defendant doctor and alleged that the defendant hospital was liable for his negligence. The defendant hospital asked the court to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims through summary judgment. The court denied the motion, and the defendant appealed. Continue reading

Published on:

Most plaintiffs pursuing medical malpractice claims will rely on a jury rather than a judge to decide issues of liability and damages. As juries are comprised of human beings, though, they are not immune to mistakes, and in some cases, they fail to rule in accordance with the evidence. Luckily, the law allows parties who feel that a jury ruled improperly to seek a new trial or a judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Obtaining such relief is not easy, however, as demonstrated in a recent opinion set forth by a New York court in a medical malpractice case. If you suffered harm due to incompetent care rendered by a physician, you have the right to pursue claims for your losses, and it is smart to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

Background of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent was hospitalized due to a pulmonary embolism. He was subsequently diagnosed with cancer and later died. The plaintiff, the executor of his estate, filed a wrongful death and medical malpractice lawsuit naming the hospital and numerous doctors as defendants. The matter progressed to trial, and after the plaintiff presented her evidence, she settled with one of the defendants. The trial concluded, after which the jury found that while the first individually named defendant departed from the standard of care, the second had not. The plaintiff moved to set aside the verdict as to the second individually named defendant. The trial court denied her request, and she appealed.

Grounds for Overturning a Verdict in a Medical Malpractice Case

On appeal, the court expounded that a court may not set aside a jury’s verdict in favor of a defendant unless it finds that the evidence weighs so heavily in favor of the plaintiff that the jury could not have reached the verdict had it fairly interpreted the evidence. If a verdict aligns with a reasonable view of the evidence, though, the defendant is entitled to the presumption that the jury adopted a reasonable view. Continue reading

Contact Information