Corsack v. Brody

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Corsack v. Brody

255 A.D.2d 222, 679 N.Y.S.2d 822, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12458

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

DecidedNovember 19, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 255 A.D.2d 222 (Corsack v. Brody) 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

Corsack v. Brody, 255 A.D.2d 222, 679 N.Y.S.2d 822, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12458 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.), entered on or about April 10, 1997, which, inter alia, granted defendants’ motion, made at the [223]*223close of plaintiffs case, to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 4401, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this action for medical malpractice, the court properly dismissed the complaint at the close of plaintiffs case, since there was no rational basis upon which the jury could have found in favor of plaintiff (see, Storniolo v Bauer, 176 AD2d 550, lv denied 79 NY2d 752). The testimony adduced at trial, including that of plaintiffs medical expert, failed to show either that defendants’ treatment of plaintiff deviated from accepted medical practice or that any such departure on the part of defendants was a substantial factor in causing the decedent’s pain and suffering or subsequent death (see, Mortensen v Memorial Hosp., 105 AD2d 151). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.), entered on or about April 10, 1997, which, inter alia, granted defendants’ motion, made at the [223]*223close of plaintiffs case, to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 4401, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this action for medical malpractice, the court properly dismissed the complaint at the close of plaintiffs case, since there was no rational basis upon which the jury could have found in favor of plaintiff (see, Storniolo v Bauer, 176 AD2d 550, lv denied 79 NY2d 752). The testimony adduced at trial, including that of plaintiffs medical expert, failed to show either that defendants’ treatment of plaintiff deviated from accepted medical practice or that any such departure on the part of defendants was a substantial factor in causing the decedent’s pain and suffering or subsequent death (see, Mortensen v Memorial Hosp., 105 AD2d 151). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 A.D.2d 222, 679 N.Y.S.2d 822, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12458, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corsack-v-brody-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack