Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog

Court Discusses Liability Under New York’s Scaffold Law

Published on: June 30, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Generally, people who suffer harm in the workplace cannot pursue personal injury claims against their employers and instead are limited to recovering workers’ compensation benefits. They can seek damages from other parties that may be responsible for their harm, however. Further, in some instances, the law allows for the absolute imposition of liability for harm suffered while working. This was illustrated in a recent New York case in which the court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff due to the defendant’s violation of New York’s scaffold law. If you were injured in an accident caused by another party’s negligence, you might be owed damages, and it is smart to meet with a Syracuse personal injury attorney to assess your rights.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff, who worked for a plumbing company, suffered injuries when he fell while installing a shower curtain rod in a bathroom. He did not have adequate room to use an A-frame ladder and instead stood on the rim of the bathtub. The bathroom did not have artificial lighting and was dim. The plaintiff struck his head on the rod and fell to the floor.

Allegedly, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the general contractor and lessee, asserting, among other things, that there were liable under New york’s scaffold law. The court granted the motion with regard to the scaffold law claim, and the defendants appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Causation in Car Accident Cases

Published on: June 28, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In New York car accident cases, a plaintiff must do more than just show that the defendant’s negligence caused the collision in order to recover damages. Specifically, they must also show that they suffered actual losses due to the collision. Generally, the issue of causation is within the purview of the jury, though. This was demonstrated recently in a New York opinion issued in a car accident case, in which the court reversed a trial court ruling dismissing the plaintiff’s claims. If you were hurt in a collision, it is important to understand what evidence you must produce to recover compensation, and you should contact a Syracuse car accident attorney to discuss your potential claims.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the defendant struck the plaintiff’s car from behind. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant, setting forth a negligence claim. After the completion of discovery, the defendant moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the plaintiff failed to prove her alleged injuries were the result of the collision. The court agreed and granted the defendant’s motion. The plaintiff then appealed.

Establishing Damage and Causation in Car Accident Cases

On appeal, the court reversed the trial court ruling. In doing so, it explained the issue of causation is typically one that should be resolved by the fact-finder. Summary judgment may be appropriate, however, even if there is objective medical proof of serious harm, if there are additional factors that interrupt the chain of causation between the claimed injury and the accident. Such factors may include a gap in treatment, a preexisting condition, or an intervening medical issue. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Federal Jurisdiction over Medical Malpractice Claims

Published on: June 25, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

People aggrieved by medical malpractice generally have the right to pursue claims in the forum of their choosing. There are limits to that right, though. Among other things, they can only present their claims to a court if they are within the court’s jurisdiction. If the court finds that a plaintiff’s case is not properly before them, it may dismiss it, as demonstrated in a recent ruling issued by a New York court in a medical malpractice case. If you or a loved one suffered harm due to the negligence of a medical professional, it is wise to confer with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to determine your rights.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations

It is alleged that the plaintiff, as the administrator of the decedent’s estate, filed a pro se medical malpractice claim against the defendant, a county medical examiner. The impetus of the plaintiff’s claim was not provided, and she did not provide any facts regarding the defendant’s alleged medical negligence. She filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis as well. The magistrate judge assigned to the case denied the plaintiff’s application and recommended that her complaint be dismissed without prejudice due to lack of jurisdiction.

Federal Jurisdiction over Medical Malpractice Claims

The court explained that when a plaintiff requests to proceed in forma pauperis, the court must dismiss their case if at any time they assess that the action is malicious or frivolous, neglects to state a claim on which relief may be granted, or pursues monetary damages from a party that is immune from such relief. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Procedural Requirements in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: June 20, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

People who lose loved ones due to ineffectual medical care have the right to pursue medical malpractice and wrongful death claims against the providers responsible for their losses. In doing so, however, they must comply with any applicable procedural rules or laws; otherwise, their claims may be dismissed. This was illustrated in a recent opinion issued in a New York medical malpractice case in which the court dismissed the plaintiff’s case due to her failure to exhaust her administrative remedies. If you lost a loved one due to medical malpractice, it is smart to meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney about your possible causes of action.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendants, a group of 29 medical professionals and entities, in a New York state court. She asserted that the defendants negligently caused her husband’s death and, therefore that they were liable for malpractice. The defendants subsequently filed a notice of removal, transferring the case to federal court. They then filed motions to substitute the United States as the defendant, as the named defendants were a federally funded facility and its employees, and to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims on the grounds that the plaintiff failed to exhaust her administrative remedies.

Allegedly, the plaintiff opposed the defendants’ motions and filed her own motion to remand the case back to state court. A federal magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation that the court grant the defendants’ motions be granted. Neither the plaintiff nor the defendants filed objections to the magistrate’s report. The court ultimately agreed with the magistrate and dismissed the plaintiff’s claims. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Discusses Expert Qualifications in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: June 15, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Most doctors undergo training for their specialty and have little experience working in other areas. This does not mean that a doctor can only offer expert testimony in medical cases involving the precise area of their practice, however. Instead, as shown in a recent New York opinion, a doctor can offer expert testimony outside of their field if they are otherwise qualified. If you were hurt by a negligent doctor, it is in your best interest to speak to a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer about what evidence you need to produce to demonstrate liability.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent, who was 61 years old, presented to the emergency department of the defendant hospital with complaints of shortness of breath. He underwent a chest x-ray and was diagnosed with pneumonia. The radiologist that interpreted his chest x-ray noted that he had a normal-sized heart, and his lungs showed mild bibasilar interstitial prominence. He was subsequently discharged with a prescription for antibiotics and a directive to follow up with his primary care doctor.

Reportedly, he underwent a second chest x-ray that showed his heart was at the upper limit of normal, and his lungs were clear. He continued to suffer from chest pain and shortness of breath. Approximately six months later, he died from systolic heart failure and dilated cardiomyopathy. His wife then filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the hospital and the radiologists who interpreted his chest x-rays. The defendants moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the plaintiff’s experts were not qualified to offer opinions on the standard of care that applied to radiologists. The court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Court Discusses Demonstrating Proximate Cause in New York Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: June 11, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Although doctors have an obligation to provide their patients with competent care, it is not uncommon for a doctor to make mistakes during the treatment of a patient. While medical negligence may provide grounds for pursuing a medical malpractice claim, a careless physician will only be held accountable if their negligence proximately caused a patient to suffer harm. In other words, negligence, in and of itself, does not constitute medical malpractice, as explained in a recent New York ruling. If you suffered harm because of the recklessness of your treatment provider, you have the right to seek compensation, and you should meet with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent a mastectomy of her right breast in 1998 due to breast cancer. She began to experience breast pain in 2010 and advised her physiatrist of her symptoms. The physiatrist prescribed her an ultrasound, which she underwent; the results were normal. She subsequently underwent an MRI, which revealed a mass in her right breast. The plaintiff intercepted the communication between the physiatrist and the radiologist describing the abnormality.

Allegedly, a second doctor that plaintiff saw referred her to a breast surgeon, who provided her with referrals for additional testing and stressed the urgency of her situation. The plaintiff did not feel comfortable with the surgeon, however, and delayed seeking any additional treatment for one year. When she sought care, she was diagnosed with Stage IV breast cancer. She filed a lawsuit against her treatment providers, alleging that their delayed diagnosis worsened her prognosis. The defendant’s moved for summary judgment, and the court ruled in their favor. The plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

New York Court Grants Summary Judgment in Favor of Plaintiff in a Medical Malpractice Case

Published on: June 6, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

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 ›

Court Explains Burdens of Proof in New York Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: May 31, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

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 ›

New York Court Discusses Notice in Medical Malpractice Claims Against Public Corporations

Published on: May 28, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

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 ›

New York Court Analyzes EMT Liability for Injuries Sustained During Transportation to the Hospital

Published on: May 26, 2022 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

People suffering from critical medical issues are often transported to the hospital by emergency medical technicians (EMTs) via an ambulance. EMTs are expected to employ reasonable care when transporting patients, and if they do not, it can result in injuries. In some cases, though, a person injured by the negligence of an EMT will be precluded from recovering damages due to New York’s laws regarding government-function immunity, as discussed in a recent New York opinion. If you were injured by an EMT, you might be able to pursue claims for damages, and it is smart to contact a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the plaintiff was being transported to the hospital by EMTs employed by the defendant city. During the trip, he unbuckled his restraints and jumped out of the ambulance. He subsequently suffered injuries. He proceeded to file claims against the defendant, alleging the negligence of the EMTs caused him harm. In response, the defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that it was immune from liability pursuant to the doctrine of governmental function immunity. After reviewing the motion, the court adopted the defendant’s reasoning and ruled in its favor, dismissing the plaintiff’s claims. The plaintiff appealed.

EMT Liability for Injuries Sustained During Transportation to the Hospital

The appellate court affirmed the trial court ruling on appeal. In doing so, it explained that pursuant to the doctrine of governmental function immunity, government actions that are discretionary in nature cannot form the basis of liability. Ministerial actions, on the other hand, may be grounds for imposing liability, but only if they violate a duty owed specifically to the plaintiff that is separate from any duty owed to the public generally. Continue Reading ›