Summary
In Humphrey v Jewish Hosp. & Med. Center (172 A.D.2d 494 [2d Dept 1991]), a general surgeon was held to be qualified to render an opinion in the specialty of obstetrics and gynecology.
Summary of this case from Khurdayan v. KassirOpinion
April 1, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Pizzuto, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
We find that material issues of fact exist, inter alia, as to whether the defendant Isadore Roy Gold used appropriate care in the prenatal treatment of the plaintiff's wife and delivery of the infant. To grant summary judgment it must clearly appear that no material and triable issues of fact are presented (see, Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 324; Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Center, 64 N.Y.2d 851, 853; Canosa v. Abadir, 165 A.D.2d 823).
The defendant claims that since the plaintiff's expert was a general surgeon he was unqualified to render an opinion in the specialty of obstetrics or gynecology. The defendant's claim is without merit. A physician need not be a specialist in a particular field in order to be considered a medical expert (see, Fuller v. Preis, 35 N.Y.2d 425; Joswick v. Lenox Hill Hosp., 161 A.D.2d 352; Kletnieks v. Brookhaven Mem. Assn., 53 A.D.2d 169; Fisch, New York Evidence § 428, at 277; Richardson, Evidence § 368 [Prince 10th ed]). Mangano, P.J., Lawrence, Rosenblatt and Miller, JJ., concur.