Bani-Esraili v. Lerman

• Decision Date: 17 February 1987
• Docket Number: A,BANI-ESRAIL
• Parties: , 505 N.E.2d 947 Davidppellant, et al., Plaintiff, v. Marvin S. LERMAN, as Executor of Philip Wald, Deceased, Respondent, et al., Defendant.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

Page 382

513 N.Y.S.2d 382

69 N.Y.2d 807, 505 N.E.2d 947

David BANI-ESRAILI, Appellant, et al., Plaintiff, v. Marvin S. LERMAN, as Executor of Philip Wald, Deceased, Respondent, et al., Defendant.

Court of Appeals of New York.

Feb. 17, 1987.

Martin Diennor and Abraham Fuchsberg, New York City, for appellant.

Roger P. McTiernan and Carol Ann Weinman, New York City, for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division, 121 A.D.2d 192, 503 N.Y.S.2d 273, should be affirmed, with costs.

In this "wrongful birth" action, the trial court properly held that plaintiff could not recover from the estate of defendant doctor the costs of those extraordinary expenses which plaintiff might incur for the continued support and special care of his son, born with thalassemia major, after the child reaches the age of 21. Under New York law, a parent has no legal obligation to continue the support of a child after majority, notwithstanding plaintiff's assertion of a moral obligation to do so in this case (see, e.g., Family Ct.Act § 413[1]; Domestic Relations Law § 32[3]; Social Services Law § 101[1]; and see, Besharov, Practice Commentary, McKinney's Cons. Laws of N.Y., Book 29A, Family Ct.Act § 413, pp. 65-66; and see, 1966 N.Y.Legis.Ann., at 326-327 [Governor's Message to Legislature, discussing L.1966, ch. 256, entitled "Medical Assistance for Needy Persons"] ). Thus, plaintiff may be compensated only in the amount that represents his legally cognizable injury, namely the increased financial obligation arising from the extraordinary medical treatment rendered the child during minority (see, Alquijay v. St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hosp. Center, 63 N.Y.2d 978, 979, 483 N.Y.S.2d 994, 473 N.E.2d 244; Becker v. Schwartz, 46 N.Y.2d 401, 413, 413 N.Y.S.2d 895, 386 N.E.2d 807). The argument that public policy is better served by permitting plaintiff to recover the cost of his son's postmajority extraordinary expenses is more appropriately addressed to the Legislature (see, Alquijay v. St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hosp. Center, 63 N.Y.2d 978, 979, 483 N.Y.S.2d 994, 473 N.E.2d 244, supra).

WACHTLER, C.J., and SIMONS, KAYE, ALEXANDER, TITONE, HANCOCK and BELLACOSA, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.