From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Beck v. Ausubel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 15, 1999
266 A.D.2d 328 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

Submitted September 22, 1999

November 15, 1999

Kelly, Rode Kelly, LLP (Mauro Goldberg, Great Neck, N Y [Barbara D. Goldberg and Kenneth Mauro] of counsel), for appellant.

Levine Grossman, Mineola, N.Y. (Scott D. Rubin of counsel), for respondents.

LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., FRED T. SANTUCCI, MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, HOWARD MILLER, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Alpert, J.), dated October 28, 1998, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

Contrary to the conclusion reached by the Supreme Court, we find that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that he underwent a continuing course of treatment so as to toll the Statute of Limitations (see, CPLR 214-a; Young v. New York City Health Hosps. Corp., 91 N.Y.2d 291 ; Nykorchuck v. Henriques, 78 N.Y.2d 255 ;Yachnin v. Levine, 257 A.D.2d 571 ). Thus, the action is time-barred and the defendant is entitled to summary judgment.

BRACKEN, J.P., SANTUCCI, ALTMAN, FRIEDMANN, and H. MILLER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Beck v. Ausubel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 15, 1999
266 A.D.2d 328 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Beck v. Ausubel

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS BECK, et al., respondents, v. HERBERT AUSUBEL, ETC., appellant

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

Date published: Nov 15, 1999

Citations

266 A.D.2d 328 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
698 N.Y.S.2d 163

Citing Cases

Heaney v. Hiz

The issues raised on appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal…