Majorka v. St. Catherine's Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Majorka v. St. Catherine's Hospital

24 A.D.2d 988, 265 N.Y.S.2d 115, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2876

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

DecidedDecember 6, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.2d 988 (Majorka v. St. Catherine's Hospital) 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

Majorka v. St. Catherine's Hospital, 24 A.D.2d 988, 265 N.Y.S.2d 115, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2876 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action by an infant and his father to recover damages for personal injuries, loss of services, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of Supreme Court, Kings County, entered January 23, 1963, upon a directed verdict in favor of the defendant, St. Catherine’s Hospital, after the granting of its motion to set aside a verdict in the plaintiffs’ favor. As against the defendant, Nudelman, the action had been discontinued at the opening of the trial. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. In our opinion, the evidence offered by plaintiffs in this medical malpractice case was sufficient to require submission of the issues to the jury. Though we find that plaintiffs established a prima facie case, it is also our opinion that the verdicts were against the weight of the evidence. We think that the interests of justice require a new trial so that plaintiffs may offer proof with respect to the issues of negligence by the defendant involving not only the manner of the cutdown operations performed on the infant plaintiff, but also the proper treatment of the infant before and after the discovery of osteomyelitis, the prevention of its spread, and the disclosure of the condition to the infant’s parents. Christ, Acting P. J., Hill, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action by an infant and his father to recover damages for personal injuries, loss of services, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of Supreme Court, Kings County, entered January 23, 1963, upon a directed verdict in favor of the defendant, St. Catherine’s Hospital, after the granting of its motion to set aside a verdict in the plaintiffs’ favor. As against the defendant, Nudelman, the action had been discontinued at the opening of the trial. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial granted, with costs to abide the event. In our opinion, the evidence offered by plaintiffs in this medical malpractice case was sufficient to require submission of the issues to the jury. Though we find that plaintiffs established a prima facie case, it is also our opinion that the verdicts were against the weight of the evidence. We think that the interests of justice require a new trial so that plaintiffs may offer proof with respect to the issues of negligence by the defendant involving not only the manner of the cutdown operations performed on the infant plaintiff, but also the proper treatment of the infant before and after the discovery of osteomyelitis, the prevention of its spread, and the disclosure of the condition to the infant’s parents. Christ, Acting P. J., Hill, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 988, 265 N.Y.S.2d 115, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2876, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/majorka-v-st-catherines-hospital-nyappdiv-1965.