G.G. v. Yonkers General Hospital

50 A.D.3d 472, 858 N.Y.S.2d 11
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 17, 2008
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 50 A.D.3d 472 (G.G. v. Yonkers General Hospital) 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
G.G. v. Yonkers General Hospital, 50 A.D.3d 472, 858 N.Y.S.2d 11 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Betty Owen Stinson, J.), entered July 10, 2006, which granted defendant hospital’s motion for summary judgment to the extent of dismissing the entire complaint against all defendants, unanimously modified, on the law, so much of the complaint as claimed negligent retention reinstated against defendant hospital, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

This action seeks recovery for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff in 1993, while a patient at defendant hospital, when she was sexually assaulted and raped by a male nurse at the hospital.

In order to recover against an employer for negligent retention of an employee, a plaintiff must show that “the employer was on notice of a propensity to commit the alleged acts” (White v Hampton Mgt. Co. L.L.C., 35 AD3d 243, 244 [2006]). The hospital met its initial burden for summary dismissal of the claim of negligent retention by submitting evidence that during the six years the nurse had worked for the hospital prior to the incident, he received positive reviews.

In opposition, plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact based on the testimony of a nursing aide who had previously reported that the nurse had offered a patient medication in exchange for sex. As plaintiff and the other patients were in a drug rehabilitation program, this knowledge could be found by the trier of fact to have triggered a duty to protect plaintiff from a known or suspected sexual predator (see N.X. v Cabrini Med. Ctr., 97 NY2d 247 [2002]). While we recognize that the record reflects questions about the credibility of the nursing aide, resolution of such issues is not for the court. Concur—Andrias, J.E, Friedman, Buckley, Catterson and Acosta, JJ.

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

Related

Rizzo v. Estate of Polifrone
2021 NY Slip Op 01731 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Hicks v. Berkshire Farm Center & Services for Youth
123 A.D.3d 1319 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Acosta-Rodriguez v. City of New York
77 A.D.3d 503 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Taylor v. United Parcel Service, Inc.
72 A.D.3d 573 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
50 A.D.3d 472, 858 N.Y.S.2d 11, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gg-v-yonkers-general-hospital-nyappdiv-2008.