Ferlito v. Dara

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ferlito v. Dara

306 A.D.2d 874, 761 N.Y.S.2d 902, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6909

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

DecidedJune 13, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 306 A.D.2d 874 (Ferlito v. Dara) 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

Ferlito v. Dara, 306 A.D.2d 874, 761 N.Y.S.2d 902, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6909 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from that part of an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (Martoche, J.), entered August 2, 2002, that denied the motion of defendant John D. Urschel, M.D. seeking summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint against him.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed with costs.

Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied the motion of John D. Urschel, M.D. (defendant) seeking summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint against him. The conflicting opinions of the experts for plaintiff and defendant with respect to causation and defendant’s alleged deviation from the accepted standard of medical care present credibility issues that cannot be resolved on a motion for summary judgment (see Gedon v Bry-Lin Hosps., 286 AD2d 892, 894 [2001], lv denied 98 NY2d 601 [2002]). Present — Pine, J.P., Hurlbutt, Gorski, Lawton and Hayes, JJ.

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

—Appeal from that part of an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (Martoche, J.), entered August 2, 2002, that denied the motion of defendant John D. Urschel, M.D. seeking summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint against him.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed with costs.

Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied the motion of John D. Urschel, M.D. (defendant) seeking summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint against him. The conflicting opinions of the experts for plaintiff and defendant with respect to causation and defendant’s alleged deviation from the accepted standard of medical care present credibility issues that cannot be resolved on a motion for summary judgment (see Gedon v Bry-Lin Hosps., 286 AD2d 892, 894 [2001], lv denied 98 NY2d 601 [2002]). Present — Pine, J.P., Hurlbutt, Gorski, Lawton and Hayes, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

306 A.D.2d 874, 761 N.Y.S.2d 902, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6909, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ferlito-v-dara-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack