From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Armstrong v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 13, 1995
214 A.D.2d 812 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

April 13, 1995

Appeal from the Court of Claims (Orlando, J.H.O.).


Evidence that a physician, in prescribing medication, deviated from a clear and explicit standard contained in the drug manufacturer's recommendations to the medical profession constitutes prima facie evidence of negligence if there is competent medical evidence that the patient's injury resulted from the physician's failure to adhere to the manufacturer's recommendations (see, Nicolla v Fasulo, 161 A.D.2d 966, 968; Paul v Boschenstein, 105 A.D.2d 248, 249). Assuming that claimant submitted sufficient evidence to establish the physician's deviation from a clear and explicit standard contained in the drug manufacturer's recommendations to the medical profession, the claim was properly dismissed because there is no competent medical evidence to establish that the medications were a proximate cause of the injuries claimed by claimant (see, Paul v Boschenstein, supra, at 250). Whether and to what extent the medications contributed to claimant's condition is not a matter of common knowledge which a fact finder could decide in the absence of expert testimony (see, Macey v Hassam, 97 A.D.2d 919, 920).

Mikoll, J.P., White, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Armstrong v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 13, 1995
214 A.D.2d 812 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Armstrong v. State

Case Details

Full title:DELANO C. ARMSTRONG, Appellant, v. STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent

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

Date published: Apr 13, 1995

Citations

214 A.D.2d 812 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
625 N.Y.S.2d 317

Citing Cases

Spensieri v. Lasky

"Where a drug manufacturer recommends to the medical profession (1) the conditions under which its drug…

Spensieri v. Lasky

We are unpersuaded. During the direct examination of her expert, Michael Brodman, plaintiff endeavored to…