From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Prince v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 14, 1989
149 A.D.2d 963 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

April 14, 1989

Appeal from the Court of Claims, Quigley, J.

Present — Callahan, J.P., Denman, Green, Pine and Lawton, JJ.


Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and defendant's motion granted, in accordance with the following memorandum: The State appeals from an order of the Court of Claims which denied its motion to dismiss the claim on the ground that it was not accompanied by a CPLR 3012-a certificate of merit. In denying the claim, the court determined that the claim sounds solely in negligence, not medical malpractice, and that a CPLR 3012-a certificate thus was not required to be filed with the claim. We disagree.

The claim seeks damages for the conscious pain and suffering and wrongful death of claimants' decedent, who committed suicide after being refused admission to the Rochester Psychiatric Center, a State facility. Although claimants now contend that the claim asserts the negligent failure of the institution to maintain proper procedures for the intake and release of patients, the notice of intention and claim primarily allege that defendant's physicians and other medical personnel failed to diagnose, record and treat the patient's suicidal condition. Such allegations sound in medical malpractice, notwithstanding that they relate to the hospital as a whole rather than to individual employees (see, Bleiler v. Bodnar, 65 N.Y.2d 65, 69-71). Claimants' avoidance of the phrase "medical malpractice" in their claim is not controlling.

Since the claim sounds, at least in part, in medical malpractice, it should have been accompanied by a certificate of merit (CPLR 3012-a [a]; Santangelo v. Raskin, 137 A.D.2d 74; Brown v. State of New York, 139 Misc.2d 1020; Sullivan v. H.I.P. Hosp., 138 Misc.2d 711; Hannah v. McLaughlin, 137 Misc.2d 277; Steinberg v. Brookdale Hosp. Med. Center, 134 Misc.2d 268). Although the courts have taken a variety of approaches in determining the proper sanction to be imposed for the failure of a plaintiff to serve the certificate of merit with the complaint, we regard the failure to comply with CPLR 3012-a as a pleading default (see, Santangelo v. Raskin, supra; see also, Brown v State of New York, supra). Since claimants failed to show a reasonable excuse for the default or that they have a meritorious cause of action (Santangelo v. Raskin, supra; Brown v. State of New York, supra), noncompliance with the statute requires dismissal. Dismissal is without prejudice to reservice of the claim accompanied by a proper certificate of merit.


Summaries of

Matter of Prince v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 14, 1989
149 A.D.2d 963 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

Matter of Prince v. State

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of CHRIS T. PRINCE, Individually and as Administratrix of…

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

Date published: Apr 14, 1989

Citations

149 A.D.2d 963 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
540 N.Y.S.2d 97

Citing Cases

Smith v. McDaniel

Memorandum: It was error for the court in this medical malpractice action to grant plaintiff's motion for…

Smith v. Cruz

We disagree. The failure to comply with the requirements of CPLR 3012-a has been regarded as a…