Articles Posted in Medical Malpractice

A patient that seeks emergency care in a hospital and subsequently suffers a loss of a limb or other critical harm may have grounds for pursuing medical malpractice claims against the hospital and its doctors. Defendants in medical malpractice cases rarely concede liability, however, regardless of the gravity of the harm suffered, and in many instances, they will seek dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims via summary judgment. In a recent New York ruling, the court discussed the burdens of proof imposed on each party in a medical malpractice case and what the plaintiff must show to withstand a defendant’s motion for summary judgment. If you were hurt by negligent care rendered in a hospital, it is in your best interest to meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer regarding your possible claims.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is alleged that the plaintiff visited the emergency department of the defendant hospital with complaints of numbness and pain in her left foot. She was evaluated by the defendant emergency physician and the defendant vascular surgeon, both of whom found no evidence of acute limb-threatening or vascular issues. The defendant surgeon discharged the plaintiff and directed her to follow up with him the next day, but when she tried to make an appointment, her request was refused.

It is reported that the plaintiff eventually underwent an evaluation with a different vascular surgeon, who determined she had no pulse in her left foot. Her left leg was ultimately amputated below the knee. She subsequently brought medical malpractice claims against the defendants. After discovery, the defendants moved for dismissal via summary judgment. The trial court denied their motion, and they appealed. Continue Reading ›

It is not uncommon for people harmed by incompetent medical treatment to suffer other injuries at the hands of the parties responsible for their care. As such, they may assert medical malpractice claims along with other causes of action in a single lawsuit, usually in federal court. Federal courts have limited jurisdiction, however. As such, if a plaintiff fails to demonstrate the court’s exercise of jurisdiction over their state law medical malpractice claims is proper, they may be dismissed. This was demonstrated recently in an opinion issued by a New York court. If you sustained losses due to incompetent medical care, you should contact a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to determine what causes of action you may be able to assert against your health care provider.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff was admitted to a medical facility where he was administered a pain reliever. He subsequently developed bleeding in the intestinal tract that caused him to die on three occasions. He was revived each time and ultimately underwent life-saving surgery. He developed significant side effects after the surgery, however, including dementia, blurred vision, and mobility issues. He subsequently filed a federal lawsuit against the defendants, alleging numerous claims, including medical malpractice. The court then evaluated whether it had jurisdiction over his claims.

Federal Jurisdiction Over State Law Medical Malpractice Claims

The court noted that the plaintiff set forth state medical malpractice claims in his complaint. He failed, however, to assert facts demonstrating that the court had subject matter jurisdiction over such claims. The court explained that, as a federal court, it had limited jurisdiction, as established by 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1332. Pursuant to those statutes, federal courts can only exercise jurisdiction over matters in which a federal question is presented or where the plaintiff and defendants are citizens of different states, and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. Continue Reading ›

People harmed by medical malpractice are often eager to litigate their claims. In some instances, though, a plaintiff will neglect to take action or move a case forward for several years. In such cases, the court may find it appropriate to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims for failure to prosecute. In a recent opinion issued in a New York medical malpractice case, the court explained the factors for evaluating whether to dismiss a matter for failure to prosecute. If you suffered harm due to medical malpractice, it is smart to meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer as soon as possible to discuss what claims you may be able to assert.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent sought treatment from the defendant doctor at the defendant medical center, which the federal government-owned and operated. The decedent subsequently suffered a myocardial infarction, which proved to be fatal. Her husband then filed a medical malpractice case against the defendants under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

Reportedly, the plaintiff’s attorney withdrew, after which the court directed the plaintiff to obtain new counsel or otherwise indicate that he intended to pursue his claims per se. The plaintiff did not respond, however, even though the court warned him on two occasions that his case would be dismissed. As such, the plaintiff’s lawsuit was ultimately dismissed due to his failure to prosecute his case. Continue Reading ›

Many facilities that provide medical care are operated by the state or federal government. While patients harmed by negligent medical care at such facilities have the right to seek compensation for their losses through medical malpractice claims, they must comply with certain notice requirements. If they fail to provide timely notice, their claims may be dismissed, as illustrated by a recent New York ruling. If you were hurt by the negligence of your doctor, you have the right to pursue damages, and you should speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to evaluate your potential claims.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff lived in a state-owned facility. While he was there, he underwent surgical repair of a fracture in his right foot. He began to experience pain immediately after the surgery, but his requests for pain medication were denied. He continued to complain of pain, but his reports were largely disregarded. He ultimately underwent an evaluation, after which he was informed that the treatment that he was provided was improper, and he developed arthritis due to the negligent care. He subsequently instituted a lawsuit against the state, asserting numerous claims, including medical malpractice. The defendant then moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims.

Notice Requirements in Medical Malpractice Cases Against Municipal Entities

The defendant argued, among other things, that the plaintiff’s state law medical malpractice claims against it must be dismissed, as the plaintiff failed to comply with the Notice of Claim requirements, which were conditions precedent to filing suits against public corporations or their employees under New York municipal law. Continue Reading ›

People harmed by reckless health care providers have the right to seek compensation for their losses. They must do so in a timely manner, however, or their claims may be barred by the statute of limitations. While the statutory period may be tolled in some situations, a plaintiff bears the burden of proving such tolling is proper. If they cannot, their claims may be dismissed, as shown in a recent ruling issued in a New York medical malpractice case. If you were hurt due to negligently rendered medical care, you might be owed damages, and you should confer with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer as soon as possible to avoid waiving your right to recover compensation.

The Plaintiff’s Claims

Allegedly, in 2013, the plaintiff suffered injuries in a fall at a restaurant. She was then transported by ambulance to the defendant hospital, where she was treated by the defendant nurse and other parties. She presumably suffered harm due to the care she received from the defendant’s employees, as in 2015, she filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendants. She ultimately discontinued her claims via stipulation with a reservation of her rights under CPLR 205(a).

It is reported that in 2017, she then commenced a lawsuit against the defendants, apparently pursuant to the six month extension of the statute of limitations under CPLR 205(a). The defendants moved to dismiss the claims against them as time barred. The court ultimately granted the defendant’s motion. Continue Reading ›

It is an unfortunate reality that a patient can visit a cardiologist, receive a clean bill of health, and subsequently suffer a fatal heart attack a few days later. In such instances, the inclination is most likely to believe that the cardiologist negligently performed its duties, and therefore should be liable for malpractice. As demonstrated in a recent New York ruling issued in a cardiology malpractice matter, however, that is not always the case. If you or your loved one sustained losses due to negligent treatment of a heart issue, you should speak to a  Syracuse cardiology malpractice lawyer regarding your potential claims.

The Decedent’s Care

Reportedly, the decedent presented to the hospital with complaints of chest pain in July 2012. He underwent a heart catheterization that showed he suffered from a 75% narrowing of a coronary artery, which he was advised could be treated with medication. A week later, he visited the defendant’s cardiologist for a second opinion. The defendant recommended that the decedent continue to treat his heart issues with medication instead of an angioplasty.

It is alleged that in October 2012, the decedent underwent a stress test that was interpreted by a second cardiologist named as a defendant, who determined the decedent did not require emergent care. One month later, however, the decedent suffered a fatal heart attack. The plaintiff, his wife,  commenced a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendants, alleging they failed to properly diagnose and treat a blockage in the decedent’s heart, The defendants ultimately moved for summary judgment, and the court granted their motion. The plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Typically, parties in a medical malpractice case will settle their disputes prior to going to trial. If a matter is tried, however, issues of liability and damages will likely be assessed by a jury rather than a judge. While juries are tasked with assessing the evidence presented and making a determination based on that evidence, they do not always issue verdicts in accordance with the evidence. Fortunately, though, the law allows parties to ask the courts to set aside verdicts in medical malpractice matters in which they believe the jury’s verdict is improper. The grounds for vacating a medical malpractice verdict were the topic of a recent New York ruling issued in an allergist malpractice case. If you suffered harm due to the negligence of your allergy doctor, it is smart to meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to assess your options for seeking compensation.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the decedent contacted the defendant allergist regarding an allergic reaction. The defendant concluded the decedent’s reaction was caused by a blood pressure medication that he had been taking for the last three years and advised him to stop taking the medication. The defendant saw the decedent on two additional occasions and again confirmed he was no longer taking the drug that caused the reaction.

Allegedly, the defendant failed to confer with the decedent’s primary care physician to inform him the decedent should no longer be taking the medication. The decedent collapsed and died a few weeks later. The cause of death was determined to be anaphylactic shock caused by the drug pressure medication. The decedent’s estate filed a medical malpractice case against the defendant. The cause proceeded to trial, and the jury found in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant then filed a motion to set aside the verdict. Continue Reading ›

Medical malpractice trials can be costly and emotionally exhausting, and litigants run the risk that the judge or jury determining liability will rule against them regardless of how persuasive their evidence is. Thus, in many cases, it is prudent for a plaintiff in a medical malpractice case to settle their claims prior to trial. Settling a case is not always as straightforward as merely accepting a defendant’s offer, though, as demonstrated in a recent New York ruling. If you were injured by inadequate medical care, it is smart to speak to Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer regarding your rights.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the decedent went to an urgent care facility funded by the federal government, with complaints of shortness of breath and chest pain lasting a week. He underwent an EKG which was reviewed by the attending physician’s assistant, who assessed it as “OK” but noted a “few PVCs.” She diagnosed the decedent with gastroesophageal reflux disease and sent him home. The following morning, the decedent was found deceased. An autopsy revealed the cause of his death to be a cardiac arrhythmia which was caused by arteriosclerotic heart disease.

Allegedly, the plaintiff filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the defendant pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (the Act). The plaintiff’s expert subsequently opined that if the physician’s assistant had complied with the standard of care, the decedent’s condition would have been properly treated, and he would still be alive. The parties proceeded to mediation and were able to reach a settlement agreement. The plaintiff then filed a motion for approval of the settlement. Continue Reading ›

Delays in obtaining an accurate diagnosis can have grave consequences. As such, doctors who carelessness neglect to provide their patients with a timely diagnosis should be held accountable. A plaintiff harmed by a doctor’s inattentive care can often recover damages for medical malpractice, but if the doctor was a federal employee, the plaintiff must provide adequate notice of the claim prior to filing a lawsuit. The obligations imposed on plaintiffs pursuing claims against medical professionals that are government employees were the topic of a recent opinion issued in a New York primary care malpractice case. If you suffered harm due to the negligence of your primary care physician, it is in your best interest to meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to discuss your rights.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the plaintiff complained of painful urination, foul-smelling urine, and other urological symptoms to the defendant primary care physician on numerous occasions. At the time he was experiencing symptoms, the plaintiff was living in a federal facility, and the defendant physician was a federal employee. Despite his complaints, the defendant did not perform a urine culture or refer the plaintiff to a specialist. When he ultimately went to a specialist a year and a half later, he was diagnosed with Stage IV prostate cancer.

It is alleged that the cancer then spread to his spine, causing him to be paraplegic. He subsequently filed medical malpractice claims against the defendant physician and negligent hiring claims against the defendant facility, pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (the Act). The defendants then moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims. Continue Reading ›

Generally, in medical malpractice cases, plaintiffs will present evidence of the harm suffered and ask the jury to issue a verdict in their favor but will not request a specific damages amount. As such, what constitutes an appropriate amount of compensation is typically within the purview of the jury. If a defendant feels that a verdict is unjust, it may move for a judgment to be modified, however. Recently, a New York court discussed what a court considers when determining whether a judgment in a medical malpractice case is excessive, in a matter in which the defendant’s negligence caused the plaintiff’s decedent’s death. If you lost a loved one because of a careless physician, it is in your best interest to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer to assess your possible claims.

The History of the Case

It is reported that the defendant gynecologist treated the plaintiff’s decedent. During the course of her care, she complained of symptoms indicating ovarian issues, but no testing was performed. She was ultimately diagnosed with ovarian cancer after it had progressed and spread to other parts of her body. She died from the disease a short time later.

Allegedly, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant, alleging his negligent failure to diagnose the decedent’s ovarian cancer caused her death. The case was tried in front of a jury who awarded over $3 million in damages to the plaintiff. The defendant moved to set aside the jury’s verdict as excessive, and the court denied the motion, after which the defendant appealed. Continue Reading ›