Johnson v. Benezra

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Johnson v. Benezra

279 A.D.2d 425, 719 N.Y.S.2d 849, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 903

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

DecidedJanuary 30, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 279 A.D.2d 425 (Johnson v. Benezra) 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

Johnson v. Benezra, 279 A.D.2d 425, 719 N.Y.S.2d 849, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 903 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered on or about April 2, 1999, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied, and the complaint reinstated.

In this medical malpractice matter involving long-term psychiatric treatment, plaintiffs expert’s affidavit, when considered in light of the entire factual record, sufficiently raised triable, material issues of fact regarding causation of injury as well as deviation from accepted practices. Such factual issues include whether defendant’s intervention, allegedly pursued after plaintiff decided to terminate treatment, precipitated identifiable injuries to plaintiffs fragile psychological equilibrium and to his underlying condition (see, Stewart v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 207 AD2d 703, 704, lv denied 85 NY2d 809; Minelli v Good Samaritan Hosp., 213 AD2d 705, 706-707). Concur — Williams, J. P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered on or about April 2, 1999, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied, and the complaint reinstated.

In this medical malpractice matter involving long-term psychiatric treatment, plaintiffs expert’s affidavit, when considered in light of the entire factual record, sufficiently raised triable, material issues of fact regarding causation of injury as well as deviation from accepted practices. Such factual issues include whether defendant’s intervention, allegedly pursued after plaintiff decided to terminate treatment, precipitated identifiable injuries to plaintiffs fragile psychological equilibrium and to his underlying condition (see, Stewart v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 207 AD2d 703, 704, lv denied 85 NY2d 809; Minelli v Good Samaritan Hosp., 213 AD2d 705, 706-707). Concur — Williams, J. P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

279 A.D.2d 425, 719 N.Y.S.2d 849, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 903, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-benezra-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack