Articles Posted in Medical Malpractice

Medical malpractice claims against public hospitals present unique procedural hurdles that can be just as critical as the underlying medical issues. New York law requires strict compliance with notice-of-claim statutes before a plaintiff may pursue state-law tort claims against municipal entities. Failure to meet these requirements can bar otherwise meritorious malpractice claims, as discussed in a recent New York case. If you were harmed by negligent treatment at a public hospital, it is advisable to consult a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to protect your rights.

Facts and Procedural History

It is reported that the plaintiff was involuntarily admitted to a public hospital for psychiatric treatment and remained hospitalized for approximately one week. The hospitalization formed the basis of subsequent legal claims alleging improper medical and psychiatric care during the admission.

Allegedly, the plaintiff commenced a federal civil action asserting constitutional claims arising from the involuntary admission and treatment. The lawsuit named the public hospital and individual physicians as defendants and proceeded through discovery and pretrial scheduling over more than a year. Continue Reading ›

Rear-end motor vehicle collisions remain one of the most common causes of personal injury claims in New York, yet liability disputes frequently arise even when the facts appear straightforward. Courts are often asked to determine whether a trailing driver can overcome the presumption of negligence that applies in rear-end crashes. A recent decision from a New York court reinforces the legal standards governing these cases and clarifies the limited circumstances under which a defendant may avoid summary judgment on liability. If you were injured in a car accident, you should confer with a Syracuse personal injury attorney who can help clarify how these rules apply and what steps are necessary to protect a claim after a serious collision.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff commenced a personal injury action seeking damages for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. The plaintiff alleged that while operating her vehicle, she was struck from behind by a vehicle operated by the defendant driver and owned by a co-defendant.

Allegedly, following the commencement of the action, the plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the issue of liability. The motion asserted that the plaintiff’s vehicle was stopped at the time of the impact and that the defendant driver failed to maintain a safe distance and speed, resulting in a rear-end collision. Continue Reading ›

Medical malpractice and wrongful death cases frequently turn on procedural rulings that determine whether claims will ever reach discovery or trial. Among the most consequential are motions addressing statutes of limitations and the manner in which courts evaluate early dismissal requests. A recent decision from a New York court emphasizes the importance of following proper motion practice and preserving a plaintiff’s opportunity to litigate factual disputes related to timeliness and continuous treatment. If you lost a loved one due to a delayed diagnosis, you should consider speaking with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to understand how procedural law may affect your case.

Facts and Procedural History

It is reported that the plaintiff commenced an action individually and as the proposed administrator of a decedent’s estate seeking damages for medical malpractice, wrongful death, and related claims arising from the decedent’s medical care at a hospital and by treating physicians. The complaint alleged that departures from accepted medical practice contributed to the decedent’s injuries and eventual death.

Allegedly, after the defendants answered the complaint, certain hospital and physician defendants moved to dismiss the action on statute-of-limitations grounds pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(5). The defendants also sought dismissal of a separate cause of action alleging emotional distress under CPLR 3211(a)(7) for failure to state a claim. Continue Reading ›

When injuries or death occur in a county-owned medical facility, the affected family often faces not only medical uncertainty but also complex procedural requirements governing claims against municipal entities. New York’s notice-of-claim rules operate on accelerated timelines, and failure to comply can bar claims that might otherwise be viable. A recent New York decision concerning treatment provided by a county hospital illustrates how courts evaluate accrual, continuous treatment, and late-notice applications in cases involving malpractice, negligence, and wrongful death. If you believe improper medical care in a public facility caused serious harm to a loved one, you should speak with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to safeguard your rights.

Facts of the Case and Procedural History

It is reported that the decedent was first admitted to the respondent county hospital in early September 2022 following injuries from a fall. During this initial admission, the hospital provided treatment for injuries related to the fall, and the decedent later returned to the facility for rehabilitation services. The decedent remained at the hospital through late September 2022, during which time a second fall allegedly occurred inside the facility. This event was followed by additional complications, further treatment, and ultimately surgical intervention to address the worsening condition.

Allegedly, after the decedent was discharged, the medical condition deteriorated significantly, and the decedent died from sepsis in mid-November 2022. The claimant later sought to pursue medical malpractice, negligence, and wrongful death claims against the county and its hospital, asserting that the hospital’s alleged failures in supervision, monitoring, and treatment contributed to the injuries and subsequent death. Continue Reading ›

When patients undergo surgery, they trust their doctors to follow accepted medical standards and provide proper care during recovery. Unfortunately, not every patient’s experience meets that expectation. When complications arise after surgery, determining whether they stem from medical negligence or natural healing challenges can be complex. A recent New York decision highlights how courts evaluate these claims and what evidence is necessary to proceed to trial. If you or someone you love suffered complications after surgery, consulting an experienced Syracuse medical malpractice attorney can help you understand your rights and whether the facts of your case support a claim.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the plaintiff initiated a medical malpractice action against the defendants, a group of orthopedic physicians and their affiliated medical practice, alleging negligent treatment following a knee injury. The plaintiff underwent surgical repair for a torn meniscus, followed by post-operative care administered by the defendant physicians. After the procedure, the plaintiff continued to experience swelling, pain, and instability in the operated knee, ultimately claiming that the defendants’ improper surgical technique and inadequate follow-up caused additional damage requiring further medical intervention.

Allegedly, the plaintiff contended that the defendants failed to properly assess imaging studies, misdiagnosed the extent of the injury, and failed to advise on or implement appropriate physical therapy protocols. The complaint further asserted that the defendants’ conduct deviated from accepted medical standards and proximately caused prolonged pain and functional impairment. The defendants denied the allegations and moved for summary judgment, submitting expert affirmations asserting that all care provided complied with accepted orthopedic practices and that the plaintiff’s residual symptoms resulted from pre-existing degenerative changes, not medical negligence. Continue Reading ›

When families consent to medical treatment, they do so with the expectation that doctors will both follow accepted standards of care and provide clear information about the risks involved. A failure in either respect can have devastating consequences and often leads to medical malpractice lawsuits. Yet such cases are not won by suspicion alone; courts demand solid evidence and credible expert testimony to establish liability. A recent ruling from a New York court shows how quickly a case can collapse when a plaintiff’s expert opinion is deemed speculative or unsupported. If you or a loved one has suffered harm after treatment, you should consult a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney.

Case Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff, individually and as administrator of the decedent’s estate, brought an action alleging medical malpractice and lack of informed consent against multiple defendants, including a physician who provided testosterone therapy. The plaintiff claimed that this treatment contributed to the decedent’s decline and death.

Allegedly, the defendant physician moved for summary judgment to dismiss the claims against him, arguing that his care met accepted standards and that the decedent had been properly informed of the risks of testosterone therapy. He also sought, in the alternative, to preclude portions of the plaintiff’s expert’s testimony. The trial court denied the defendant’s motion in September 2023, permitting the claims to proceed. The defendant appealed. Continue Reading ›

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 ›

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 ›

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 ›

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 ›