Stolpe v. Staten Island Hosp.
| Decision Date | 21 November 1957 |
| Citation | 3 N.Y.2d 961,169 N.Y.S.2d 32 |
| Parties | , 146 N.E.2d 790 Theodore STOLPE, as Administrator of the Goods, Chattels and Credits of Paul Stolpe, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STATEN ISLAND HOSPITAL, Inc., Defendant, and Morris Schnittman, Defendant- Respondent. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.
Administrator of the goods, chattels and credits of deceased patient bought action against hospital by service of summons and complaint on December 13, 1949, for personal injuries sustained by patient on January 16, 1949 when he was burned by application of hot water bottles and for the wrongful death of the patient. On December 27, 1951, physician was served with order allowing service of supplemental summons and complaint and with supplemental summons and amended complaint, and he made a motion to dismiss the amended complaint, on grounds that causes of action, if any, were barred by two year statute of limitations applicable to malpractice actions and by Section 130 of the Decedent Estate Law, Consol.Laws, c. 13.
The Supreme Court, Richmond County, Alfred V. Norton, J., entered an order granting the motion, and the administrator appealed.
The Appellate Division, with one justice dissenting, affirmed the order.
The administrator appealed to the Court of Appeals, Contending that the sole question was whether physician, in ordering an allegedly incompetent and unqualified person, who was not employed by physician and not known by physician, to apply hot water bottles to patient, was guilty of ordinary negligence, which would be actionable within three years, or whether the action was to be classified as a malpractice action and actionable within two years.
Jerome Otis Ellis, St. George (Donald L. Ochs, Staten Island, on the brief), for plaintiff-appellant.
Martin, Clearwater & Bell, New York City (William C. Richardson, New York City, and Donald J. Fager, Staten Island, of counsel), for defendant-respondent.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Golia v. Health Ins. Plan of Greater New York
...268 N.Y. 445, 198 N.E. 23, 101 A.L.R. 1223; Stolpe v. Staten Island Hospital, Inc., 282 App.Div. 896, 124 N.Y.S.2d 915, affirmed 3 N.Y.2d 961, 169 N.Y.S.2d 32). His cause of action accrued when he suffered the injury complained of which occurred at the latest when he was last treated by Ken......