Ocasio-Gary v. Lawrence Hospital
| Decision Date | 05 January 2010 |
| Docket Number | 6229/99.,1465.,86084/07,1467N.,1467NA.,1466. |
| Citation | 69 A.D.3d 403,894 N.Y.S.2d 11,2010 NY Slip Op 3 |
| Parties | CINDY OCASIO-GARY, Respondent, v. LAWRENCE HOSPITAL et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants. (And a Third-Party Action.) CINDY OCASIO-GARY, Appellant, v. ST. BARNABAS HOSPITAL, Respondent, et al., Defendants. (And a Third-Party Action.) CINDY OCASIO-GARY, Respondent, v. LAWRENCE HOSPITAL et al., Defendants, and GARY B. ORIN, Appellant. (And a Third-Party Action.) |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
order, same court and Justice, entered April 18, 2008, which granted defendant St. Barnabas Hospital's motion for summary judgment, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in appeal from the judgment. Order, same court and Justice, entered October 16, 2008, which, to the extent appealed from, denied the motion by defendant Lawrence Hospital and renewal of a prior motion by third-party defendant Westchester County Medical Center on behalf of itself and defendants Borchert, Rizvi and Dworkin, for change of venue, and granted plaintiff's cross motion to retain venue in Bronx County, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alison Y. Tuitt, J.), entered June 17, 2008, which, to the extent appealed from, denied defendant Orin's cross motion to vacate the note of issue and certificate of readiness and to extend his time to serve a motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The affirmation of St. Barnabas's medical expert fails to establish prima facie that the treatment of plaintiff's decedent in the emergency room of St. Barnabas Hospital comported with good and accepted practice. The record shows that the decedent was brought to the emergency room by ambulance with complaints of headache, nausea, palpitations and of having an anxiety attack that was not relieved by medications that had been previously prescribed by his private physicians. The expert opines that the decedent was appropriately evaluated and appeared to respond favorably and that the evaluation was well within the standard of care for emergency medicine. However, the expert does not specify in what way the decedent was evaluated and he does not elucidate the standard of care for emergency medicine other than to state that emergency room staff has the limited role of determining whether a patient has a life-threatening or serious illness. While the expert opines that the decedent did not require a urine test, blood test, CT scan,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Daniele v. Pain Mgmt. Ctr. of Long Island
...or evaluating urgent back pain (see Galluccio v. Grossman , 161 A.D.3d 1049, 1052, 78 N.Y.S.3d 196 ; cf. Ocasio–Gary v. Lawrence Hosp. , 69 A.D.3d 403, 405, 894 N.Y.S.2d 11 ). Edelson, a pediatrician, had minimal experience in emergency medicine. More importantly, that experience, which con......
-
Sheiffer v. Fox
...69 A.D.3d 403, 404 [1st Dept 2010]). Stated another way, the defendant's expert's opinion must "explain 'what defendant did and why'" (id., quoting Wasserman v Carella, A.D.2d 225, 226 [1st Dept 2003]). Moreover, to satisfy his or her burden on a motion for summary judgment, a defendant mus......
-
Bledsoe v. Ctr. for Human Reprod.
...should specify "in what way" the patient's treatment was proper and "elucidate the standard of care" (Ocasio-Gary v Lawrence Hospital, 69 A.D.3d 403, 404 [1st Dept 2010]). Stated another way, the defendant's expert's opinion must "explain 'what defendant did and why'" (id., quoting Wasserma......
-
Munoz v. N.Y. Presbyterian-Columbia Univ. Med. Ctr.
...69 A.D.3d 403, 404 [1st Dept 2010]). Stated another way, the defendant's expert's opinion must "explain 'what defendant did and why'" (id., quoting Wasserman v Carella, 307 A.D.2d 226 [1st Dept 2003]). Moreover, to satisfy his or her burden on a motion for summary judgment, a defendant must......
-
Expert witnesses
...507 (4th Dept. 2011). Nurse practitioner may diagnose cervical sprain in motor vehicle accident case. Ocasio-Gary v. Lawrence Hosp. , 69 A.D.3d 403, 894 N.Y.S.2d 11 (1st Dept. 2010). Plaintiff ’s expert, who was board-certified in internal medicine, was qualified to opine as to diagnosis an......
-
Expert witnesses
...rules for dentists with regard to anesthesia. EXPERT WITNESSES §16:110 NEW YORK OBJECTIONS 16-28 Ocasio-Gary v. Lawrence Hospital , 69 A.D.3d 403, 894 N.Y.S.2d 11 (1st Dept. 2010). Plaintif ’s expert, who was board certiied in internal medicine, was qualiied to opine as to diagnosis and tre......
-
Expert witnesses
...defendant’s expert testiied that there were separate rules for dentists with regard to anesthesia. Ocasio-Gary v. Lawrence Hospital , 69 A.D.3d 403, 894 N.Y.S.2d 11 (1st Dept. 2010). Plaintif ’s expert, who was board certiied in internal medicine, was qualiied to opine as to diagnosis and t......
-
Expert witnesses
...defendant’s expert testified that there were separate rules for dentists with regard to anesthesia. Ocasio-Gary v. Lawrence Hospital , 69 A.D.3d 403, 894 N.Y.S.2d 11 (1st Dept. 2010). Plaintiff’s expert, who was board certified in internal medicine, was qualified to opine as to diagnosis an......