Logan-Baldwin v. Morningstar
This text of 187 A.D.2d 1023 (Logan-Baldwin v. Morningstar) 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.
Opinion
Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: The latest date upon which defendants treated plaintiff Emmelyn Logan-Baldwin was October 19, 1984, when defendant Dr. Morning-star examined plaintiff for the last time without scheduling a future appointment (see, Massie v Crawford, 78 NY2d 516; Rizk v Cohen, 73 NY2d 98, 103; Richardson v Orentreich, 64 NY2d 896, 898; McDermott v Torre, 56 NY2d 399, 405). The evidence upon which plaintiffs rely to establish continuing treatment after that date is insufficient as a matter of law (see, Cooper v Kaplan, 163 AD2d 215, affd 78 NY2d 1103; Parrott v Rand, 126 AD2d 621, lv denied 69 NY2d 611). Consequently, Supreme Court erred by denying defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ complaint as time-barred. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Affronti, J.— [1024]*1024Summary Judgment.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Boomer, Bailo, Fallon and Doerr, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
187 A.D.2d 1023, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/logan-baldwin-v-morningstar-nyappdiv-1992.