These are recent case decisions regarding medical malpractice that we think are interesting. The firm of Sholes & Miller is not involved in these matters.
Gaston v. NYCH&HC (2nd Dept 2022) – Plaintiff’s decedent appeared at Kings County Hospital with scratches on his forearm and stated that he had attempted to commit suicide. After 20 hours of treatment and observation, he was discharged. He committed suicide the next morning. Plaintiff alleged medical malpractice. The defendant moved for summary judgment, meeting its burden of proof by submitting a board-certified psychiatrist’s opinion that the discharging physician made a reasonable decision in accordance with the appropriate standard of care when she determined that the decedent was no longer an immediate risk to himself, and referred him to an outpatient clinic for follow-up. The Second Department noted that in order to “hold a physician or his or her employer ‘responsible for damages resulting from the actions of a psychiatric patient who has been released when the patient’s release is a matter of professional judgment … it must be shown that the decision to release the patient was something less than a professional medical determination founded upon a careful examination of the patient’ (cit om).” The plaintiff’s expert opinion was held to be conclusory, speculative, and unsupported by the evidence.
Source: NYS Law Reporting Bureau, NY Official Reports, Slip Opinion Service
Source: https://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2022/2022_04716.htm
Submitted by Ellen A. Fischer, Sholes & Miller, PLLC
Jean-Paul v. Jamaica Hospital Medical Center (2nd Dept. 2022) – Plaintiff alleged an “occupational therapist failed to exercise a heightened level of care to avoid burns, properly supervise the therapy session, or provide the plaintiff with instructions for burn care”. The Court held such claims “sound in medical malpractice, not ordinary negligence. Because the plaintiff challenged the occupational therapist’s assessment of the plaintiff’s supervisory needs during his physical therapy session, the conduct at issue derived from the duty owed to the plaintiff as a result of the physical therapist-patient relationship and was substantially related to his medical treatment (cit. om.).” This is significant in cases where plaintiffs attempt to allege ordinary negligence instead of malpractice, in the context of provision of therapy services.
Source: NYS Law Reporting Bureau, NY Official Reports, Slip Opinion Service
Source: https://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2022/2022_04794.htm
Submitted by Ellen A. Fischer, Sholes & Miller, PLLC
