Haynesworth v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Haynesworth v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

195 A.D.2d 424, 600 N.Y.S.2d 711

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

DecidedJuly 29, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 195 A.D.2d 424 (Haynesworth v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.) 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

Haynesworth v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp., 195 A.D.2d 424, 600 N.Y.S.2d 711 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas E. Mc-Keon, J.), entered January 8, 1992, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant hospital’s decision to release its psychiatric patient, who committed suicide the next day, was a considered medical judgment, the product of a careful examination for which it cannot be held liable (see, Bell v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 90 AD2d 270, 280). Unlike the situation in Cohen v State of New York (51 AD2d 494, affd 41 NY2d 1086), decedent was released after a psychiatric interview and the hospital records amply document his psychiatric [425]*425history. The assertion of plaintiffs medical expert that the release evaluation was incomplete is unsupported by the record (see, Mohan v Westchester County Med. Ctr., 145 AD2d 474, 475) and fails to raise a triable issue of fact. Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Asch and Rubin, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Douglas E. Mc-Keon, J.), entered January 8, 1992, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant hospital’s decision to release its psychiatric patient, who committed suicide the next day, was a considered medical judgment, the product of a careful examination for which it cannot be held liable (see, Bell v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 90 AD2d 270, 280). Unlike the situation in Cohen v State of New York (51 AD2d 494, affd 41 NY2d 1086), decedent was released after a psychiatric interview and the hospital records amply document his psychiatric [425]*425history. The assertion of plaintiffs medical expert that the release evaluation was incomplete is unsupported by the record (see, Mohan v Westchester County Med. Ctr., 145 AD2d 474, 475) and fails to raise a triable issue of fact. Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Asch and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

195 A.D.2d 424, 600 N.Y.S.2d 711, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haynesworth-v-new-york-city-health-hospitals-corp-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack