Brennan v. MacDonald

2023 NY Slip Op 34765(U)
CourtNew York Supreme Court, Nassau County
DecidedMay 19, 2023
DocketIndex No. 601143/21
StatusUnpublished

This text of 2023 NY Slip Op 34765(U) (Brennan v. MacDonald) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court, Nassau County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Brennan v. MacDonald, 2023 NY Slip Op 34765(U) (N.Y. Super. Ct. 2023).

Opinion

Brennan v MacDonald 2023 NY Slip Op 34765(U) May 19, 2023 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: Index No. 601143/21 Judge: Randy Sue Marber Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 05/19/2023 01:23 PM INDEX NO. INDEX NO. 601143/2021 601143/2021 DOC. NO. NYSCEF DOC. NO. 73 NYSCEF: 05/19/2023 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/19/2023

SHORT FORM ORDER

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NASSAU

Present: HON. RANDY SUE MARBER JUSTICE TRIAL/IAS PART 2 ____________________x MICHAEL W. BRENNAN,

Plaintiff, Index No.: 601143/21 Motion Sequence ... 01 -against- Motion Date ... 02/01/23 XXX GLENN J. MACDONALD, M.D.,

Defendant. ____________________x Papers Submitted: Order to Show Cause ............................................... x Affirmation in Opposition ................................. x Reply Affirmation .......................................... x

Upon the foregoing papers, the motion by the Defendant, GLENN J.

MacDONALD, M.D. ("Defendant" or "Dr. MacDonald"), brought by Order to Show

Cause signed by this Court (12/19/22, Peterson, J.) seeking an Order for, inter alia, the

following relief: (1) pursuant to CPLR §3211 (a)(7) dismissing the complaint of the

Plaintiff, MICHAEL W. BRENNAN ("Plaintiff'), pursuant to the waiver and limitation on

civil action clauses contained in the Federal statute known as "Air Transportation Safety

System and Stabilization Act, Public Law 107-42", that was triggered by the Plaintiffs

filing of a claim through the September 11 th Victim Compensation Fund (the "VCF");

(2) pursuant to CPLR § 3025, granting Defendant leave to amend his answer to include the

affirmative defenses of "Waiver and/or Estoppel" based upon Plaintiffs election to

1 of 99 [* 1] FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 05/19/2023 01:23 PM INDEX NO. INDEX NO. 601143/2021 601143/2021 DOC. NO. NYSCEF DOC. NO. 73 NYSCEF: 05/19/2023 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/19/2023

proceed with a claim through the VCF; and (3) upon the granting of leave to amend

Defendant's answer, an Order, pursuant to CPLR § 321 l(a)(l), (a)(3) and/or (a)(5)

dismissing the Plaintiffs complaint as barred by the Air Transportation Safety and System

Stabilization Act, Public Law 107-42, as a result of Plaintiff's filing of a claim through the

VCF, is decided as hereinafter provided.

Facts and Procedural History

In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York

City's World Trade Center, the Plaintiff, then employed as a Bay Constable in the Town

of Hempstead, responded to the attack site, colloquially known as "Ground Zero," in order

to provide assistance. The Plaintiff was initially sent for the purpose of transporting injured

individuals and survivors, however, once it was determined that there would be no more

survivors, he assisted in providing security for the area and in transporting workers who

could not reach lower Manhattan by vehicle. The Plaintiff was part of a crew that ferried

rescue workers between Staten Island and New Jersey and lower Manhattan.

Following his service, the Plaintiff was eligible to and did enroll in the World

Trade Center Health Clinic (the "Clinic") for purposes of undergoing yearly screening

examinations. As a result of these weekly screenings, on or about July 2, 2015, the Plaintiff

received a letter from the Clinic notifying him that he had abnormal blood test results and

advising him to follow up with his primary care physician, the Defendant, Dr. MacDonald.

Specifically, the Plaintiff had blood in his urine and fatty liver. The Plaintiff recalled

bringing these results to Defendant's attention, however, Defendant did not recommend

any specific follow up to address these issues.

2 of 99 [* 2] FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 05/19/2023 01:23 PM INDEX NO. INDEX NO. 601143/2021 601143/2021 DOC. NO. NYSCEF DOC. NO. 73 NYSCEF: 05/19/2023 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/19/2023

In or about December of 2020, the Plaintiff saw Dr. MacDonald for his

annual physical. During that visit, Defendant told Plaintiff that his Prostate-Specific

Antigen (commonly known as "PSA") levels were high, and that he had sent Plaintiff a

message through the "patient portal." The Plaintiff, though, was unaware of what the

"patient portal" was. The Defendant then referred the Plaintiff to a Dr. Katz from NYU

Langone Urology. The Plaintiff presented to Dr. Katz on or about December 16, 2020, and

advised him of the high PSA and that it potentially could be prostate cancer. Dr. Katz

confirmed for Plaintiff that his PSA was indeed high and referred him for further testing.

The testing confirmed that Plaintiff did indeed have prostate cancer. The Plaintiff was

advised that his cancer had advanced to such a stage that surgery was the only option for

him. The Plaintiff had the prostate cancer surgery on February 24, 2021 and some mild

complications thereafter.

On January 28, 2021 - prior to his surgery of February 24, 2021 - the

Plaintiff filed this medical malpractice action alleging that the Defendant, his former

primary care physician, committed malpractice by failing to appreciate the findings in

Plaintiffs laboratory results and failing to disseminate those finding to Plaintiff, which

ultimately led to a failure to timely diagnose Plaintiffs prostate cancer.

After his surgery, in or about late February-early March 2021, the Plaintiff

sought to file a claim with the VCF. As a result, on or about March 3, 2021, Plaintiff

received a letter from the World Trade Center Health Program (the "Program") confirming

that his prostate cancer was certified as covered for treatment benefits through the Program.

3 of 99 [* 3] FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 05/19/2023 01:23 PM INDEX NO. INDEX NO. 601143/2021 601143/2021 DOC. NO. NYSCEF DOC. NO. 73 NYSCEF: 05/19/2023 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/19/2023

The Plaintiff then received a letter from the VCF on or about March 12, 2021 confirming

the receipt of his claim.

Discovery proceeded in this action, apparently without Defendant being

advised that Plaintiff had filed a claim with the VCF. Once discovery was complete, the

Plaintiff filed his Note of Issue on November 11, 2021. Settlement conferences were held,

at the Court's direction, on July 28, 2022 and October 6, 2022. The parties were then

referred for the trial of this action. Additional settlement discussions were held at the trial

scheduling conference, to no avail, and the matter was set down for jury selection on

January 9, 2023.

Further settlement conferences were held through the Chambers of the

Administrative Judge-10 th Judicial District, Nassau County. It was over the course of

these settlement conferences, held on October 28, 2022, November 9, 2022, and December

2, 2022, that the Defendant apparently learned of Plaintiffs filing of a claim with the VCF.

Upon learning of this information, the Defendant took the position that, at the very least,

he would be entitled to a set-off for any recovery the Plaintiff received from the VCF. In

taking this position, the Defendant did note that he could not find case law on the issue

(See, Affirmation of Michael R. Walker, Esq. in Support of Defendant's Motion at 9f9fl9-

20 ["Walker Affirmation"]).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Virgilio v. City of New York
407 F.3d 105 (Second Circuit, 2005)
Diaz v. San Jose Unified School District
518 F. Supp. 622 (N.D. California, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2023 NY Slip Op 34765(U), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brennan-v-macdonald-nysupctnss-2023.