Muchler v. Penwarden

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Muchler v. Penwarden

207 A.D.2d 977, 617 N.Y.S.2d 87, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10165

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

DecidedSeptember 30, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 207 A.D.2d 977 (Muchler v. Penwarden) 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

Muchler v. Penwarden, 207 A.D.2d 977, 617 N.Y.S.2d 87, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10165 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the second cause of action. The allegation that defendant failed to inform plaintiff of the risks associated with the use of the prescribed medications Thorazine and Sinemet could support plaintiff’s right to recover for medical malpractice based on a lack of informed consent (see, Public Health Law § 2805-d [2]; Marchione v State of New York, 194 AD2d 851; Dooley v Skodnek, 138 AD2d 102). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Steuben County, Bradstreet, J.—Dismiss Cause of Action.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the second cause of action. The allegation that defendant failed to inform plaintiff of the risks associated with the use of the prescribed medications Thorazine and Sinemet could support plaintiff’s right to recover for medical malpractice based on a lack of informed consent (see, Public Health Law § 2805-d [2]; Marchione v State of New York, 194 AD2d 851; Dooley v Skodnek, 138 AD2d 102). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Steuben County, Bradstreet, J.—Dismiss Cause of Action.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 A.D.2d 977, 617 N.Y.S.2d 87, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10165, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/muchler-v-penwarden-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack