From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mitchell v. Spataro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 19, 1982
89 A.D.2d 599 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

Summary

In Mitchell v Spataro (89 A.D.2d 599), the court implied that damages in a contract action would not include pain and suffering or "other noneconomic loss".

Summary of this case from Paciocco v. Acker

Opinion

July 19, 1982


In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., based on theories of medical malpractice and breach of contract, plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Levitt, J.), dated August 5, 1981, as granted the cross motion of defendants Spataro and the Long Island Orthopaedic Group, P.C., to dismiss the second cause of action (which alleged a breach of contract) as to them. Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with $50 costs and disbursements. "The second cause of action is legally insufficient because it is merely a redundant pleading of [the injured] plaintiff's malpractice claim in another guise, an attempt to plead as a contract action one which is essentially a malpractice action." (See Monroe v. Long Is. Coll. Hosp., 84 A.D.2d 576.) It is well settled that a breach of contract claim in relation to the rendition of medical services by a physician will withstand a test of its legal sufficiency only when based upon an express special promise to effect a cure or to accomplish some definite result. ( Monroe v. Long Is. Coll. Hosp., supra; Liebler v. Our Lady of Victory Hosp., 43 A.D.2d 898; Carr v. Lipshie, 8 A.D.2d 330, affd 9 N.Y.2d 983; Robins v. Finestone, 308 N.Y. 543.) Since plaintiffs have failed to adduce proof of such an express special promise and since the damages sought are essentially for pain and suffering and other noneconomic loss, the contract claim was properly dismissed. Titone, J.P., Mangano, Weinstein and Boyers, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Mitchell v. Spataro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 19, 1982
89 A.D.2d 599 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

In Mitchell v Spataro (89 A.D.2d 599), the court implied that damages in a contract action would not include pain and suffering or "other noneconomic loss".

Summary of this case from Paciocco v. Acker
Case details for

Mitchell v. Spataro

Case Details

Full title:HERMAN P. MITCHELL et al., Appellants, v. ANTHONY SPATARO et al.…

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

Date published: Jul 19, 1982

Citations

89 A.D.2d 599 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

Citing Cases

Duquette v. Oliva

A summary judgment standard is not to be applied" ( Bast Hatfield, Inc. v Schalmont Cent. School Dist., 37…

Winegrad v. Jacobs

Plaintiffs assert a breach of contract claim arising from the rendition of medical services. Such claim will…