Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog
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.
It is further reported that the plaintiff asserted causes of action for medical malpractice, lack of informed consent, and negligent hiring and supervision. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that they did not deviate from the standard of care and that any alleged delay in diagnosis was not the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. In support, they submitted expert affirmations from specialists in obstetrics and gynecology, as well as oncology.
When a Delayed Diagnosis Constitutes Medical Malpractice
The court began by reiterating the legal standards for summary judgment in a medical malpractice case. A defendant must establish, through competent evidence, that there was no departure from the applicable standard of care or that any alleged deviation did not cause the plaintiff’s injury. If that burden is met, the plaintiff must then produce expert evidence demonstrating both a triable issue of fact and a nexus between the alleged negligence and the claimed harm.
In support of their motion, the defendants submitted an expert affirmation from a board-certified OB/GYN who reviewed the records and concluded that the care provided by the physician was entirely appropriate. The expert opined that the physician acted within the standard of care by referring the plaintiff to radiology for further assessment and relying on the imaging results, which at the time did not indicate cancer. The defendants also submitted an affirmation from an oncologist, who stated that the brief delay between the initial and subsequent imaging studies did not materially affect the plaintiff’s prognosis.
In opposition, the plaintiff offered an expert affirmation that criticized the OB/GYN’s reliance on the radiology report and argued that additional diagnostic measures should have been pursued earlier. However, the court found that the plaintiff’s expert failed to provide specific details explaining how or why earlier detection would have significantly altered the plaintiff’s treatment or outcome. The expert did not challenge the interpretation of the imaging studies or establish that the cancer was diagnosable at the time of the first visit.
Because the plaintiff’s expert failed to address the key issue of causation in a meaningful way, the court held that the plaintiff did not meet her burden in opposing the motion for summary judgment. The court also dismissed the claims for lack of informed consent, finding no evidence that the physician failed to disclose material risks or alternatives. The claim for negligent hiring and supervision was similarly dismissed, as the underlying claim for malpractice did not survive.
Speak with an Experienced Syracuse Medical Malpractice Attorney
If you believe your condition worsened because of a delayed diagnosis, the experienced Syracuse medical malpractice attorneys at DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers are here to help. Contact us at 833-200-2000 or reach out online to schedule a free and confidential consultation.