Goodspeed v. Adirondack Medical Center

43 A.D.3d 597, 842 N.Y.S.2d 598
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedAugust 9, 2007
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 43 A.D.3d 597 (Goodspeed v. Adirondack Medical Center) 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
Goodspeed v. Adirondack Medical Center, 43 A.D.3d 597, 842 N.Y.S.2d 598 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

Cardona, P.J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Dawson, J.), entered July 17, 2006 in Essex County, which denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Plaintiff awoke on June 25, 1999 at 8:00 a.m. with pain and swelling in his right testicle. When the symptoms worsened, plaintiff left work around 4:00 p.m. and went to the emergency room at defendant Adirondack Medical Center. He was evaluated by a nurse, a physician’s assistant and defendant Irwin Lieb, a urologist. Based upon plaintiffs history of heavy lifting over the weekend and the result of an ultrasound showing an enlarged epididymis with normal blood flow to the right testicle, Lieb diagnosed plaintiff with epididymitis and prescribed medication.

. Plaintiff continued to experience severe pain and swelling. He returned to the emergency room on June 27, 1999. Lieb again examined him and, relying on the results of the original ultrasound, continued the diagnosis of epididymitis and altered his medication. Although Lieb indicated in plaintiffs medical record the possibility of testicular torsion—a condition where blood supply to the testicle is cut off due to the testicle twisting—he did not order an additional ultrasound, noting that the condition was 72 hours old and the tissue would be necrotic.

When the pain and swelling did not improve, plaintiff returned to the emergency room on July 2, 1999. Lieb ordered a second ultrasound which revealed a lack of blood flow to the right testicle. Lieb then diagnosed plaintiff with right testicular torsion requiring an operation that day to remove plaintiffs right testicle.

Plaintiff thereafter commenced this medical malpractice action against, among others,

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

Related

FriedlandvVassarBrothersMedicalCenter
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014
Friedland v. Vassar Bros. Medical Center
119 A.D.3d 1183 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Tverskoy v. Ramaswami
83 A.D.3d 1195 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
D'Auria v. Kent
80 A.D.3d 956 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Seymour v. Northline Utilities, LLC
79 A.D.3d 1386 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Cowsert v. Macy's East, Inc.
79 A.D.3d 1319 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
O'Connor v. Demarest
74 A.D.3d 1522 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
One Beacon Insurance v. Travelers Property Casualty Co. of America
51 A.D.3d 1198 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
43 A.D.3d 597, 842 N.Y.S.2d 598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goodspeed-v-adirondack-medical-center-nyappdiv-2007.