Articles Posted in Miscellaneous

New York State is one of the few states that do not have a “date of discovery” statute of limitations, which can prove detrimental to many medical malpractice victims. A date of discovery statute of limitations allows a person to pursue an action from the date at which the malpractice is discovered as opposed to the date on which it occurred. This is beneficial to plaintiffs who discover an error was made after the statute of limitations has expired. Lavern’s Law, a proposed bill, would start the statute of limitations at the time the malpractice was discovered, not at the date it occurred.
Continue reading

The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department modified a trial court order that granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed a negligence complaint in a car accident case. The First Department dismissed the claim under the 90/180 day rule but allowed the plaintiff to proceed with the “permanent consequential” and “significant” limitations claim under Insurance Law 5102 (d).

The plaintiff was involved in a car accident caused by the defendant. The plaintiff suffered a lumbar and cervical spine injury, as well as a left shoulder injury. The plaintiff filed a negligence lawsuit, seeking personal injury damages for the three injuries.

The plaintiff is a police officer. After getting hurt in the accident, she saw an orthopedic specialist. The orthopedic specialist evaluated her and saw range-of-motion issues in her lumbar spine. The plaintiff missed eight weeks of work, then returned in a limited capacity.

The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department affirmed a trial court order and jury verdict that awarded the plaintiff $340,000 in future economic losses and $40,000 in past economic losses after the hospital failed to timely treat the plaintiff for pneumonia.

On the morning of January 24, 2009, the plaintiff walked into Montefiore Medical Center’s emergency room with respiratory issues. However, he wasn’t admitted to the hospital until twelve hours later. He was tentatively diagnosed with pneumonia pending further tests. He passed away five hours later in the early morning hours. The administrator of his estate filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the hospital. The case went to trial, and the jury awarded the plaintiff $40,000 for past lost wages, $680,000 for future lost wages, and $0 for pain and suffering.

The plaintiff and defendant moved to set aside the verdict. The plaintiff requested that the trial court strike testimony from an expert regarding the plaintiff’s cause of death and set aside the $0 pain and suffering award. The defendant requested that the trial court reduce the future lost wages to $340,000. The trial court denied the plaintiff’s requests but granted the defendant’s request.

The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department affirmed a trial court’s order denying summary judgment to a landlord sued by his renter after a nasty fall down the stairs.

The plaintiff lived in a duplex owned by the defendant landlord. A set of exterior metal stairs at the building led to the front entrance. The metal was corroded, and parts of the handrail that had corroded had been haphazardly welded back together. The plaintiff descended the stairs, gripping the handrail on his way down. A portion of the handrail that had been welded then broke off in the plaintiff’s grasp, causing him to tumble down the stairs. The plaintiff sustained injuries due to the fall.

The plaintiff brought a premises liability lawsuit to recover for personal injury damages. In his complaint, the plaintiff alleged that the landlord was negligent in maintaining the stairs and handrail in a safe condition. The landlord filed a motion for summary judgment, requesting that the complaint be dismissed.

The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department affirmed a trial court’s order that granted the Department of Education and hospital’s motion for summary judgment in a combined negligence and medical malpractice case.

The plaintiff was an 8-year-old child who attended a public school operated by the Department of Education. While playing on the playground, the plaintiff began to suffer a stroke. Several DOE staff were present on the playground at the time. The plaintiff began to fall, and one staff member scooped her up and caught her mid-fall. The child couldn’t stand or move her legs, so the staff member called 911.

EMS took the child to Jacobi Hospital where she was eventually diagnosed with an acute ischemic stroke. She received a CT scan and was later released.

The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department affirmed a trial court order that granted partial summary judgment for the plaintiff on liability, holding that the defendant driver was negligent when he hit the pedestrian in the crosswalk.

The plaintiff was crossing the street when he was hit by the defendant’s car. Prior to being hit, he was on the crosswalk, had already crossed two traffic lanes, and had the light. The defendant was speeding and made a quick right turn when he collided with the pedestrian. The plaintiff was knocked to the ground. When the plaintiff got up to get help, the defendant then drove off but was later caught. The plaintiff filed a negligence lawsuit for personal injury damages. The plaintiff also filed a motion for partial summary judgment.

In his motion for partial summary judgment, the plaintiff alleged that he had established a prima facie case of negligence based on the facts. The defendant opposed the motion and argued that the plaintiff had contributed to the accident with his own negligence. The defendant argued that the plaintiff did not look both ways before beginning to cross.

The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department affirmed a trial court’s order denying summary judgment for two defendants after a glass door fell on the construction worker plaintiff.

The plaintiff was working at a construction site in New York City. The site was owned by Prudential, and Pinnacle was managing the project. The plaintiff tried to walk through a glass exit door. Upon doing so, the hinge broke off, and the door crashed down onto the plaintiff. The plaintiff sustained injuries and sued the property owner and construction company for personal injury damages sustained from the construction accident.

The plaintiff made claims under Labor Law 200. Labor Law 200 is the common law negligence statute for negligence at construction sites. In making a Labor Law 200 claim, the plaintiff must show that: (1) a dangerous condition or defect existed, (2) the defendant had notice of this defect, (3) the defect injured the plaintiff, and (4) the defendant had control over the plaintiff or was responsible for supervising the plaintiff.

The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department reversed a trial court order that denied a construction worker plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment regarding a Labor Law 240 (1) claim involving a falling brick.

The plaintiff was a construction worker. The defendants were two construction companies working together on a construction project. During a construction project that involved brick work, the plaintiff was on the ground level on the north side, cleaning debris. Other workers were in the building on upper level floors doing masonry work. The building had safety nets installed on the south, east, and west sides of the building but not the north side. While looking at the ground and cleaning, the plaintiff was struck in the head by a brick that was dropped from the north side by one of the masonry workers. The plaintiff was injured.

The plaintiff brought a negligence lawsuit under Labor Law 240 (1) and filed a motion for partial summary judgment. In his motion, he alleged that he had established a prima facie case of negligence under Labor Law 240 (1) and was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. This meant that the plaintiff was arguing that it was undisputed that the construction companies were liable.

The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department affirmed a jury verdict that awarded the plaintiff $115,000 in past pain and suffering when a surgical team left a surgical instrument inside of the plaintiff.

The plaintiff was undergoing surgery at the defendant hospital at the time of the incident. A team of nurses and a surgeon were present during the operation. Someone left a surgical instrument in the defendant’s body, and the plaintiff filed a lawsuit for medical malpractice against the hospital and the surgeon. Only the claims against the hospital went to trial. After a jury verdict for the plaintiff, the jury awarded the plaintiff $115,000 for past pain and suffering.

The hospital appealed, arguing that the pain and suffering award was excessive. The Fourth Department disagreed. It held that it was reasonable compensation given the circumstances.

The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department reversed a trial court order that denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss in a personal injury case involving falling debris.

The plaintiff was a teenage student at Locust Valley High School at the time of the accident. The plaintiff volunteered with the high school’s stage crew. On the day of the incident, the plaintiff was walking down a hallway. Alongside the hallway was a series of shelves. A stick was protruding from a shelf. The plaintiff bumped into the stick. In order to move it out of the way, the plaintiff decided to pick up the stick and put it on the top shelf. The plaintiff was unable to see the top shelf, so he attempted to blindly place the stick on the shelf. While doing so, he felt the stick hit something and push something off of the shelf. In that instant, two wood boards fell off of the shelf and landed on him, injuring him.

The plaintiff filed a personal injury lawsuit against the high school, alleging premises liability. The plaintiff claimed that not only were the loose wooden boards a dangerous condition but also that the school failed to properly supervise the plaintiff.

Contact Information