From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ayoung v. Epstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 26, 1991
177 A.D.2d 460 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

November 26, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County, Ira Gammerman, J.


The record contains sufficient evidence for a factual finding that defendant's malpractice was a substantial and proximate cause of plaintiff's injuries. Plaintiff's medical expert testified that the removal of excessive temporal lobe during the operation, in an attempt to get at the source of several recurring seizures, was medically unnecessary and caused plaintiff to develop hemiplegia and become permanently disabled. Defendant's medical witnesses' contrary opinion as to the cause of plaintiff's injuries is not a ground for setting aside the verdict, either as a matter of law or as against the weight of the evidence (see, Furia v. Mellucci, 163 A.D.2d 88, 89, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 803).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Wallach, Smith and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

Ayoung v. Epstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 26, 1991
177 A.D.2d 460 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Ayoung v. Epstein

Case Details

Full title:KIMLIN AYOUNG, an Infant, by Her Father and Natural Guardian, THOMAS…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Nov 26, 1991

Citations

177 A.D.2d 460 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
576 N.Y.S.2d 556

Citing Cases

L.S. v. Harouche

Since plaintiff's psychiatric history was not probative of her claimed injury, it was properly excluded (…

Lorraine v. FORBA Holdings, LLC

Contrary to the contention of Dr. Gusmerotti, the court also properly refused to dismiss the dental…