Prigorac v. Park

20 A.D.3d 363, 799 N.Y.S.2d 53
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 28, 2005·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila AbdusSalaam, J.), entered January 16, 2004, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied and the complaint reinstated.

In this dental malpractice action arising from a root canal performed by defendant, questions of fact are presented by the experts’ conflicting opinions as to whether defendant departed from the prevailing standard of care and, if so, whether such departure resulted in plaintiffs injuries; and also by the parties’ [364]*364contradictory affidavits as to whether defendant had advised plaintiff of the possible need for retreatment by an orthodontist. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Saxe and Friedman, JJ.

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

Prigorac v. Park, 20 A.D.3d 363, 799 N.Y.S.2d 53 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

20 A.D.3d 363 (Prigorac v. Park) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cabrera v. New York University College of Dentistry
25 Misc. 3d 51 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Alvarado v. Miles
32 A.D.3d 255 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)