From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ramirez v. St. Luke's Hospital Center

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 22, 1992
188 A.D.2d 419 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

December 22, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.).


This action was brought in 1989 on behalf of the infant plaintiff, who, it is alleged, was injured through the negligence of the defendants at his birth or during the period directly following his birth in 1978, and, as a result, suffers from permanent brain damage causing seizures and mental retardation. The two years and six months statute of limitations applicable to causes of action for medical malpractice under CPLR 214-a may be tolled during a plaintiff's infancy for a maximum of ten years from the date of accrual (CPLR 208). This ten year period runs from the date of any negligent act or omission and not from the date of the termination of any continuous treatment (Matter of Daniel J. v New York City Health Hosps. Corp., 77 N.Y.2d 630). Thus, the within action, brought in 1989, more than ten years from the date of the alleged negligence, was not timely commenced and must be dismissed.

Concur — Milonas, J.P., Ellerin, Ross, Asch and Kassal, JJ.


Summaries of

Ramirez v. St. Luke's Hospital Center

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 22, 1992
188 A.D.2d 419 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

Ramirez v. St. Luke's Hospital Center

Case Details

Full title:RAMSES A. RAMIREZ et al., Respondents, v. ST. LUKE'S HOSPITAL CENTER…

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

Date published: Dec 22, 1992

Citations

188 A.D.2d 419 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
591 N.Y.S.2d 836

Citing Cases

Mortman v. Christine E. Burbige, Burbige, Kevin A. Burbige, M.D., P.C.

Subsequent continuous treatment does not change or extend the accrual date (id.). See also Ramirez v St.…