Napolitano v. Huss

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Napolitano v. Huss

272 A.D.2d 308, 708 N.Y.S.2d 304, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4813

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

DecidedMay 1, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 272 A.D.2d 308 (Napolitano v. Huss) 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

Napolitano v. Huss, 272 A.D.2d 308, 708 N.Y.S.2d 304, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4813 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Meehan, J.), entered January 22, 1999, which granted the motion of the defendant Good Samaritan Hospital for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it and denied her cross motion to compel further discovery.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant Good Samaritan Hospital established a prima [309]*309facie case for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it. The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the hospital’s alleged negligence in failing to supervise or revoke the privileges of the defendant doctors (see, Sledziewski v Ciofifi, 137 AD2d 186, 189; cf., Raschel v Risk, 110 AD2d 1067, 1068).

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Meehan, J.), entered January 22, 1999, which granted the motion of the defendant Good Samaritan Hospital for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it and denied her cross motion to compel further discovery.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant Good Samaritan Hospital established a prima [309]*309facie case for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it. The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the hospital’s alleged negligence in failing to supervise or revoke the privileges of the defendant doctors (see, Sledziewski v Ciofifi, 137 AD2d 186, 189; cf., Raschel v Risk, 110 AD2d 1067, 1068).

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. Santucci, J. P., Altman, Friedmann and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 A.D.2d 308, 708 N.Y.S.2d 304, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4813, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/napolitano-v-huss-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack