Chapman v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Chapman v. State

97 A.D.2d 975, 468 N.Y.S.2d 792, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20815

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 4, 1983

DocketClaim No. 63517

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 97 A.D.2d 975 (Chapman v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chapman v. State, 97 A.D.2d 975, 468 N.Y.S.2d 792, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20815 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: On review of the record we find ample evidence supporting the conclusions of the trial court that: (1) Dr. Parker’s decision to proceed with surgery (i.e., a right thoracotomy, possible lobectomy) without conducting additional diagnostic tests (i.e., an additional purified protein derivative [PPD] test, a sputum test and a bronchoscopic examination) was not a departure from accepted standards of medical care; and (2) claimant did not establish lack of informed consent based on Dr. Parker’s failure to discuss these further diagnostic procedures as alternatives to surgery. The evidence establishes that prior to the surgery it was reasonable to conclude that none of said tests would have been productive. We agree, therefore, with the court’s statement in its decision: “Hence, we cannot find that a reasonable medical practitioner would have advised the claimant that further testing was a viable option.” (Appeal from judgment of Court of Claims, Lowery, J. — medical malpractice.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Denman, Boomer and Moule, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: On review of the record we find ample evidence supporting the conclusions of the trial court that: (1) Dr. Parker’s decision to proceed with surgery (i.e., a right thoracotomy, possible lobectomy) without conducting additional diagnostic tests (i.e., an additional purified protein derivative [PPD] test, a sputum test and a bronchoscopic examination) was not a departure from accepted standards of medical care; and (2) claimant did not establish lack of informed consent based on Dr. Parker’s failure to discuss these further diagnostic procedures as alternatives to surgery. The evidence establishes that prior to the surgery it was reasonable to conclude that none of said tests would have been productive. We agree, therefore, with the court’s statement in its decision: “Hence, we cannot find that a reasonable medical practitioner would have advised the claimant that further testing was a viable option.” (Appeal from judgment of Court of Claims, Lowery, J. — medical malpractice.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Denman, Boomer and Moule, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

97 A.D.2d 975, 468 N.Y.S.2d 792, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20815, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chapman-v-state-nyappdiv-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack