Syracuse Personal Injury Law Blog

Appellate Tribunal Explores New York Law with Respect to Supplemental Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist (SUM) Insurance Coverage

Published on: August 9, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In evaluating the potential value of a Syracuse car accident claim, there are several considerations. What were the nature and extent of the plaintiff’s physical injuries? How much were his or her medical expenses? What about lost wages or loss of future income due to permanent disability?

These factors help inform the value of the plaintiff’s claim. However, putting a reasonable dollar amount on a case does not necessarily mean that the plaintiff will receive a check for that amount, even if there is a jury verdict in favor of him or her.

Other factors, including the limits of the negligent driver’s liability insurance policy, are also important. What if the plaintiff’s case is worth more than the defendant’s liability limits? While there may sometimes be the possibility of collecting against the defendant’s personal assets or future income, the more realistic place to look for coverage for the difference is the plaintiff’s uninsured or underinsured motorist insurance coverage, assuming that such coverage exists.

Medical Malpractice Case Dismissed by New York Court, Despite Plaintiff’s Attempt to Provide Additional Experts’ Affidavits

Published on: July 28, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In most types of civil lawsuits, including a Syracuse medical malpractice lawsuit, it is the plaintiff who has the burden of proof. This means that plaintiff must investigate and litigate the case in such a manner as to provide proof of the duty of care that applied under the circumstances, the manner in which that duty was breached, the plaintiff’s physical injuries and other damages, and proximate causation.

In medical malpractice cases, this typically includes expert testimony from one or more qualified expert witnesses. It is not enough to merely offer an expert’s general opinion on the subject matter of the case; the expert must be willing to testify in great specificity as to the negligence of the doctor, hospital, or other medical professional and how it affected the plaintiff.

Unless the plaintiff has an expert who is willing to testify at trial as to matters such as the standard of care and causation, his or her case will fail. Thus, it is crucial that a would-be medical malpractice litigant contact an attorney who is experienced in medical negligence cases and who will be able to consult an appropriate expert witness to review the case.

New York Court Dismisses Injured Man’s Claim Accusing Hospital of Negligence and Other Wrongs Following Delay in Therapy Treatment

Published on: July 23, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Timely access to healthcare can sometimes be a “life or death” matter; if the patient does not get prompt medical attention, he or she will die or suffer great physical harm. More often, however, a brief delay in care will have a much less severe outcome on the patient’s health.

A recent case explored the differences in these types of situations, with the end result being that a case accusing a hospital with negligence due to a delay in treatment was dismissed. The patient in question did promptly receive surgery for his injuries but, due to a delay in payment authorization by an insurance company, had to wait before receiving outpatient therapeutic services in follow-up to his surgery.

It is unclear from the court’s opinion what damages the patient claimed due to the delay. Perhaps he believed that his ultimate outcome would have been better had he engaged in therapy sooner, or maybe he was aggrieved by what he perceived as additional discomfort, pain, and suffering caused by the delay. If you have questions regarding the circumstances surrounding a medical provider’s delayed treatment of an injury, it is important that you speak with a Syracuse medical malpractice lawyer promptly to determine whether you may file a claim for damages.

New York Court Says Question of Fact Precluded Summary Judgment to Town in Motorcycle Accident Case

Published on: July 19, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

In addition to proving that the defendant owed the plaintiff a legal duty of some sort and that this duty was breached in some manner, the plaintiff in a Syracuse motorcycle accident case must also be able to prove that this breach of duty was the proximate cause of the accident for which he or she seeks to recover money damages. Without proof of the element of causation, the plaintiff’s case will fail.

It is not unusual for the defendant in such a case to attempt to get the case dismissed on the grounds that there are no material facts at issue and that, thus, a jury trial is unwarranted. In such a situation, the defendant is basically saying, “Even if everything the plaintiff says is true, I can’t be held liable as a matter of law.”

A fair number of negligence cases end with just such a motion, but the entry of summary judgment is not necessarily fatal to the plaintiff’s case. The appellate court is there to review the trial court’s decision – and to set an erroneous entry of summary judgment aside, if necessary.

New York Trial Court Lacked Jurisdiction to Set Aside Settlement Following Stipulation of Dismissal

Published on: July 15, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Under New York law, there are many different types of professional malpractice. For instance, a Syracuse medical malpractice case may assert that a doctor or hospital failed to follow the standard of care for a surgical procedure, or the issue may pertain to an allegedly inaccurate diagnosis or failure to diagnosis.

Cardiologists, chiropractors, dermatologists, and even dentists may find themselves as defendants in professional negligence lawsuits. The burden of proof rests with the plaintiff (the patient or his or her family, if they patient died or was rendered legally incompetent due to the alleged negligence), which means that he or she must be able to provide competent evidence as to the four elements of negligence: duty, breach of duty, damages, and causation.

Malpractice cases are often highly technical legal proceedings, requiring a number of expert witnesses and knowledge of the many statutes, case law holdings, and procedural rules applicable to such matters. It is, thus, very important that the plaintiffs in such cases retain an attorney to assist them in their endeavors.

New York Court Agrees that Summary Judgment to Manufacturer of Mixer-Grinder Was Appropriate in Butcher’s Product Liability Case

Published on: July 8, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

A Syracuse product liability case may involve one defendant, two defendants, or a long list of defendants. There may be a single theory of liability, or there may be multiple claims involving a myriad of legal theories.

One thing that is common to all product liability claims is that they demand an appropriate amount of time and attention in order to be successful; product makers fight hard against a finding of liability! A primary reason for this is the fear of manufacturers and others in the supply chain that, if one plaintiff is successful, it may open a floodgate to additional claims, potentially costing the business millions of dollars in payouts.

Therefore, defendants in these types of cases are typically very aggressive in their efforts to avoid being held liable for injuries caused by allegedly defective products. Often, this process includes a motion for summary judgment attempting to get the case dismissed before it reaches the consideration of a jury.

Despite Drug Treatment Center’s Hiring of Employee with Multiple Criminal Convictions, New York Appellate Division Finds Summary Judgement in Negligence Case Was Appropriate

Published on: June 26, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

There are a seemingly endless variety of ways in which a medical provider’s neglect and lack of concern for patient safety can lead to a Syracuse medical negligence case. In addition to cases involving a doctor’s failure to diagnose a serious illness within a reasonable amount of time or a surgeon’s neglect to obtain informed consent before performing a risky medical procedure, there are many other situations in which a patient can be hurt by an act of negligence committed by a hospital, doctor, or other healthcare worker.

Of course, results are seldom guaranteed in the medical field, and opinions can vary about what was, and what was not, negligence. Sometimes, it is up to the jury to makes these decisions, but courts can enter summary judgment on the issue in certain circumstances.

Because summary judgment effectively ends the plaintiff’s case, at least as to some claims, and/or some defendants, a court’s ruling on this matter is reviewable on appeal. The burden on appeal rests on the party seeking to disturb the lower court’s ruling; if the appellate tribunal is not convinced that a mistake was made, the trial court’s opinion will likely stand.

New York Appellate Tribunal Rules that Plaintiff’s Proffered Expert Testimony Was Properly Excluded in Medical Malpractice Case

Published on: June 22, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

One of the major differences in a Syracuse medical malpractice lawsuit and other types of negligence cases is the requirement that the plaintiff provide testimony from one or more expert witnesses. In almost all medical malpractices cases, a doctor or other healthcare professional must be willing to testify on the plaintiff’s behalf in order for him or her to prevail at trial.

There are many rules about which experts are qualified to testify and the scope of such testimony. Disputes arise frequently concerning these matters, with the trial court (and sometimes the appellate tribunals, as well) being called upon for resolution of the disagreements.

A person who has been hurt by a medical professional’s mistake should talk to an experienced medical malpractice attorney about the process of retaining an expert witness, filing a claim, and moving the case towards trial. It is important to note that not just any attorney can successfully handle a medical malpractice case, so it important to hire a firm who has experience in these types of cases.

New York Car Accident Involving Multiple Rear-End Collisions Should Not Have Been Resolved Via Summary Judgment

Published on: June 17, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

There seems to be a widely held belief that, in a rear-end collision, the driver in the second car is automatically at fault. While such a driver is usually held liable in such a situation, this is not necessarily the result in every case. It all comes down to the particular facts in the case at hand. For example, what if there was construction ahead and the first driver adhered to signage warning drivers to slow down, but the second driver did not?

What if a large animal (such a deer) ran into the path of the first vehicle, causing her to stop suddenly to avoid a dangerous crash? What if the second driver was on his or her phone and not paying attention? Sometimes such cases must be resolved by a jury, with each side making their respective arguments as to why the other was at fault.

Another potential scenario is that there wasn’t just one accident but several separate accidents that occurred in rapid succession. Who is to blame in those kinds of cases? Unfortunately, the answer is not always clear.

New York Trial Court Was Correct in Denying Motion to Vacate Dismissal of Medical Malpractice Case Due to Failure to Appear, According to Reviewing Court

Published on: June 13, 2020 | By Jeff DeFrancisco

Reaching a successful verdict or favorable settlement in a Syracuse medical malpractice case is not easy. In addition to the factual requirements (which, at least to a large degree, must be presented through the testimony of expert witnesses) of proving such a claim, there are many procedural steps that must also be dealt with in an appropriate manner.

These procedural matters include the filing of the requisite paperwork within the statute of limitation period, the completion of discovery during the time allotted by law, and appearances at various hearings scheduled by the trial court. There are many pitfalls that await a litigant who seeks to represent himself or herself – or one who makes the mistake of retaining an attorney not well-versed in these requirements.

Some penalties for untimely action or failure to appear at a particular judicially scheduled event are met with repercussions that, while detrimental, do not serve to put an end to the plaintiff’s case. Sometimes, however, a procedural misstep can spell the end of the plaintiff’s attempt to seek fair compensation for damages caused by a negligent healthcare provider.