From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Monroe v. Long Island College Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 26, 1981
84 A.D.2d 576 (N.Y. App. Div. 1981)

Summary

stating New York's current position

Summary of this case from Jackson v. Bumgardner

Opinion

October 26, 1981


Appeal by defendant from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bellard, J.), dated October 15, 1980, as denied its cross motion to dismiss, for legal insufficiency, the second cause of action asserted in plaintiff's complaint. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with $50 costs and disbursements, cross motion granted, and plaintiff's second cause of action is dismissed. Plaintiff entered the defendant hospital for the performance of a test and was injured when she had an allergic reaction to dye which was injected into her bloodstream. Her first cause of action alleges negligence in the performance of the test. The second cause of action incorporates by reference all the allegations of the first, concludes that by reason thereof "there was a contractual relationship existing between plaintiff and defendant" and asserts that defendant breached its contractual promise by failing to "render adequate and proper care and services conforming to the accepted custom and practice". The second cause of action is legally insufficient because it is merely a redundant pleading of plaintiff's malpractice claim in another guise, an attempt to plead as a contract action one which is essentially a malpractice action. The law is clear that a breach of contract claim arising out of the rendition of medical services by a physician will withstand a test to its legal sufficiency only where it is based upon an express special promise to effect a cure or to accomplish some definite result (Carr v. Lipshie, 8 A.D.2d 330, 332; Liebler v Our Lady of Victory Hosp., 43 A.D.2d 898; Sala v. Tomlinson, 73 A.D.2d 724, 725; Verra v. Koluksuz, 74 A.D.2d 932; Donah v Champlain Val. Physicians Hosp. Med. Center, 74 A.D.2d 968; cf. Robins v. Finestone, 308 N.Y. 543, 546-547; Colvin v. Smith, 276 App. Div. 9; Hirsch v Safian, 257 App. Div. 212). No special promise was alleged in plaintiff's complaint and plaintiff has failed to adduce proof that such a special promise was ever, in fact, made to her. Damiani, J.P., Gulotta, Margett and Bracken, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Monroe v. Long Island College Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 26, 1981
84 A.D.2d 576 (N.Y. App. Div. 1981)

stating New York's current position

Summary of this case from Jackson v. Bumgardner
Case details for

Monroe v. Long Island College Hospital

Case Details

Full title:GLADYS MONROE, Respondent, v. LONG ISLAND COLLEGE HOSPITAL, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 26, 1981

Citations

84 A.D.2d 576 (N.Y. App. Div. 1981)

Citing Cases

La Russo v. St. George's Univ. Sch. of Med.

With regard to the contract claim, “[t]he law is clear that a breach of contract claim arising out of the…

Johnson v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan

The claim is that the defendants breached their contracts with the plaintiffs by failing to perform in…