Polevoy v. Central Medical Group of Brooklyn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Polevoy v. Central Medical Group of Brooklyn

204 A.D.2d 421, 614 N.Y.S.2d 176, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4842

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

DecidedMay 9, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 204 A.D.2d 421 (Polevoy v. Central Medical Group of Brooklyn) 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

Polevoy v. Central Medical Group of Brooklyn, 204 A.D.2d 421, 614 N.Y.S.2d 176, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4842 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, the defendant Sang Bock Lee appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bellard, J.), dated August 10, 1992, as denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against him.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the appellant doctor’s contentions, we find that issues of fact exist as to whether he participated in the resuscitation of the infant plaintiff, and whether, if he did not, he had an affirmative duty to do so. These issues preclude the granting of summary judgment in his favor (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557). Balletta, J. P., Copertino, Hart and Krausman, 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 defendant Sang Bock Lee appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bellard, J.), dated August 10, 1992, as denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against him.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the appellant doctor’s contentions, we find that issues of fact exist as to whether he participated in the resuscitation of the infant plaintiff, and whether, if he did not, he had an affirmative duty to do so. These issues preclude the granting of summary judgment in his favor (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557). Balletta, J. P., Copertino, Hart and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 A.D.2d 421, 614 N.Y.S.2d 176, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4842, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/polevoy-v-central-medical-group-of-brooklyn-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack