Gilligan v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gilligan v. Miller

99 A.D.2d 767, 472 N.Y.S.2d 14, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17147

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

DecidedFebruary 14, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 99 A.D.2d 767 (Gilligan v. Miller) 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

Gilligan v. Miller, 99 A.D.2d 767, 472 N.Y.S.2d 14, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17147 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gowan, J.), dated December 13,1982, which granted defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3216 to dismiss plaintiff’s action for failure to prosecute, and denied plaintiff’s cross motion to compel discovery. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The record contains no affidavit from a physician, no hospital records and no other evidence to establish that there is merit to plaintiff’s claim that defendant doctor was negligent and committed malpractice. Thus the action was properly dismissed (Stolowitz v Mount Sinai Hosp., 60 NY2d 685; Hatcher v City of New York, 99 AD2d 481; Savino v Guido, 81 AD2d 860). Moreover, on the record as a whole, we find that plaintiff’s excuses for failure to comply with defendant’s 90-day notice pursuant to CPLR 3216 are insufficient or without merit. Lazer, J. P., Thompson, Bracken and Rubin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gowan, J.), dated December 13,1982, which granted defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3216 to dismiss plaintiff’s action for failure to prosecute, and denied plaintiff’s cross motion to compel discovery. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The record contains no affidavit from a physician, no hospital records and no other evidence to establish that there is merit to plaintiff’s claim that defendant doctor was negligent and committed malpractice. Thus the action was properly dismissed (Stolowitz v Mount Sinai Hosp., 60 NY2d 685; Hatcher v City of New York, 99 AD2d 481; Savino v Guido, 81 AD2d 860). Moreover, on the record as a whole, we find that plaintiff’s excuses for failure to comply with defendant’s 90-day notice pursuant to CPLR 3216 are insufficient or without merit. Lazer, J. P., Thompson, Bracken and Rubin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

99 A.D.2d 767, 472 N.Y.S.2d 14, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17147, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilligan-v-miller-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack