Mondello v. Franklin Hospital Medical Center

289 A.D.2d 210, 734 N.Y.S.2d 853, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11832

This text of 289 A.D.2d 210 (Mondello v. Franklin Hospital 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
Mondello v. Franklin Hospital Medical Center, 289 A.D.2d 210, 734 N.Y.S.2d 853, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11832 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful death, etc., the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bucaria, J.), entered June 2, 2000, which granted the defendants’ separate motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

The plaintiffs cause of action sounding in wrongful death was previously dismissed as time-barred. The defendants, on their motion for summary judgment, established, prima facie, their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law with respect to the remaining causes of action to recover damages for conscious pain and suffering, and the derivative claim (see, O’Shaughnessy v Hines, 248 AD2d 687; Bellino v Spatz, 233 AD2d 355). The burden then shifted to the plaintiff to demonstrate the existence of a triable issue of fact by submitting an expert’s affidavit attesting to a departure from accepted practice and containing an opinion that the defendants’ acts or omissions were a proximate cause of the injury (see, Domaradzki v Glen Cove Ob/Gyn Assocs., 242 AD2d 282). The affidavit of the plaintiffs expert stated that the defendants’ departures from accepted medical practice were “directly related” to the decedent’s death, but did not state that those departures [211]*211were a proximate cause of her conscious pain and suffering. That affidavit was insufficient to defeat the defendants’ motions for summary judgment (see, Yasin v Manhattan Eye, Ear & Throat Hosp., 254 AD2d 281; Fritz v Southside Hosp., 182 AD2d 671). Ritter, J. P., Krausman, Goldstein and S. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Fritz v. Southside Hospital
182 A.D.2d 671 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
Bellino v. Spatz
233 A.D.2d 355 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Domaradzki v. Glen Cove Ob/Gyn Associates
242 A.D.2d 282 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
O'Shaughnessy v. Hines
248 A.D.2d 687 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Yasin v. Manhattan Eye, Ear & Throat Hospital
254 A.D.2d 281 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
289 A.D.2d 210, 734 N.Y.S.2d 853, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11832, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mondello-v-franklin-hospital-medical-center-nyappdiv-2001.