Gedon v. Bry-Lin Hospitals, Inc.

CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
CitationGedon v. Bry-Lin Hospitals, Inc., 286 A.D.2d 892, 730 N.Y.S.2d 641 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Decision Date28 September 2001
PartiesMARY J. GEDON, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of DANA E. GEDON, M.D., Deceased, Respondent-Appellant,<BR>v.<BR>BRY-LIN HOSPITALS, INC., et al., Respondents, and TIA MATTHEWS, as Administratrix of the Estate of ARTHUR MATTHEWS, M.D., Deceased, et al., Appellants-Respondents, et al., Defendant.

Present — Pine, J. P., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Kehoe and Gorski, JJ.

Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: On February 12, 1993, Dana E. Gedon, M.D. (Gedon), an anesthesiology resident, missed a scheduled surgery, appeared disoriented and dazed when finally located, was found in possession of rubber tubing, syringes and needles, and refused to submit to a drug test. Suspecting drug abuse, Gedon's supervisor referred Gedon to the Committee for Physician's Health (CPH), which referred Gedon to the Impaired Physician Assessment Program of defendant Bry-Lin Hospitals, Inc. (Bry-Lin). The coordinator of that program requested that numerous experts evaluate Gedon to determine the possible causes of his behavior. Defendant Arthur Matthews, M.D. participated in group therapy discussions with Gedon. Defendant Frank Alabiso, Ph.D., a psychologist, d/b/a Western New York Institute for the Psychotherapies, performed a psychological evaluation and defendant Ellen S. Dickinson, M.D., a psychiatrist, performed a psychiatric evaluation, and they concluded respectively that he did not suffer from a psychological or psychiatric illness. Defendant Philip R. Scozzaro, Ph.D., an employee of Bry-Lin, performed a chemical dependency evaluation and recommended that Gedon enter group therapy. On May 28, 1993, Gedon was found dead in his home from an overdose of an anesthetic narcotic available only through hospital pharmacies.

Plaintiff commenced this action, individually and as administratrix of Gedon's estate, alleging, inter alia, that defendants failed to recommend or provide the proper treatment for Gedon's complaints of chemical dependency and addiction. Matthews, Alabiso and Dickinson each moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against them, contending that they owed no duty of care to Gedon. Matthews and Dickinson further contended that, if a duty was found to exist, they neither breached a duty of care nor caused Gedon's subsequent overdose. Plaintiff cross-moved for summary judgment on liability against all defendants.

Supreme Court erred in denying the motions of Alabiso and Dickinson. In support of their motions, Alabiso and Dickinson submitted evidence establishing that, as members of an assessment team, they evaluated Gedon to determine whether there was either a psychological or psychiatric reason for his abnormal behavior on February 12, 1993, and that, once they concluded respectively that Gedon did not suffer from a psychological or psychiatric illness, their involvement with Gedon terminated. They further established that they made no recommendations, gave no advice and provided no treatment, and plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. "[I]t is generally recognized that liability for medical malpractice may not be imposed in the absence of a physician-patient relationship" (Megally v LaPorta, 253 AD2d 35, 40; see, Lee v City of New York, 162 AD2d 34, 36, lv denied 78 NY2d 863). "In the absence of such relationship, there is no legal duty and hence no basis for liability for medical malpractice" (Campbell v Haber, 274 AD2d 946, 948 [Kehoe, J., dissenting]). It has been consistently held that "there must be something more...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
14 cases
  • McAlwee v. Westchester Health Assocs., PLLC
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • July 5, 2018
    ...Goyal, 145 A.D.3d at 954, 44 N.Y.S.3d 180 ; Latiff v. Wyckoff Hgts. Hosp., 144 A.D.2d 650, 651, 535 N.Y.S.2d 2 ; Gedon v. Bry–Lin Hosps., 286 A.D.2d 892, 893, 730 N.Y.S.2d 641 ; Sawh v. Schoen, 215 A.D.2d at 293, 627 N.Y.S.2d 7 ). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue......
  • Kingsley v. Price
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • July 6, 2018
    ..." ( Cygan v. Kaleida Health, 51 A.D.3d 1373, 1375, 857 N.Y.S.2d 869 [4th Dept. 2008] ; see Gedon v. Bry–Lin Hosps., 286 A.D.2d 892, 893–894, 730 N.Y.S.2d 641 [4th Dept. 2001], lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 601, 744 N.Y.S.2d 761, 771 N.E.2d 834 [2002] ). Here, Price and Torres were not involved in any......
  • Barner v. Depner
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • July 31, 2015
    ...are correct that in the absence of such a relationship, they cannot be held liable for medical malpractice [Gedon v. Bry–Lin Hosps., 286 A.D.2d 892, 730 N.Y.S.2d 641 (4th Dept.2001) ]. Plaintiff is correct that such a relationship need not arise out of a patient's formal consultation with a......
  • Payne v. Rome Mem'l Hosp.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • November 8, 2019
    ...[4th Dept. 2008] ; see Kingsley v. Price, 163 A.D.3d 157, 160–161, 80 N.Y.S.3d 806 [4th Dept. 2018] ; Gedon v. Bry–Lin Hosps. , 286 A.D.2d 892, 893–894, 730 N.Y.S.2d 641 [4th Dept. 2001], lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 601, 744 N.Y.S.2d 761, 771 N.E.2d 834 [2002] ). Here, defendant met its initial bur......
  • Get Started for Free