From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ceriello v. Brunswick Hospital Center, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 16, 1990
157 A.D.2d 701 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

January 16, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Meade, J.).


Ordered that on the court's own motion, the appellant's notice of appeal is treated as an application for leave to appeal, the application is referred to Justice Eiber, and leave to appeal is granted by Justice Eiber; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the panel finding is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for further proceedings in accordance herewith.

Following a unanimous finding by a medical malpractice panel of the respondents' liability, the physician member recanted his original determination in a letter sent to the respondents' counsel. Based upon the letter and the fact that the physician member of the panel was an otolaryngologist, rather than a neurologist, the specialty of the respondent doctor, the respondents moved for vacatur of the finding of the panel and for a de novo hearing before a new panel.

The fact that the physician member of the panel was not of the same medical specialty as the respondent doctor is of no legal significance (see, Kletnieks v. Brookhaven Mem. Assn., 53 A.D.2d 169, 174-176). Moreover, the respondents are entitled to a broad examination of the physician panel member at the trial (see, Bernstein v. Bodean, 53 N.Y.2d 520), where he can objectively explain his change of position, provided he does not serve as an expert for the respondents (Monaghan v. Yang, 119 A.D.2d 813). This will place the panel's finding in proper perspective for the jury. Because the "recommendation of the medical malpractice mediation [panel] serves merely as guide to the jury" (Treyball v. Clark, 65 N.Y.2d 589, 590), there was no need for vacatur. Finally, we find no appearance of impropriety resulting from the fact that the physician member reconsidered his position (cf., Scott v. Brooklyn Hosp., 93 A.D.2d 577; Seabrook v. Good Samaritan Hosp., 75 A.D.2d 849; De Camp v. Good Samaritan Hosp., 66 A.D.2d 766). Thompson, J.P., Eiber, Balletta and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Ceriello v. Brunswick Hospital Center, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 16, 1990
157 A.D.2d 701 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Ceriello v. Brunswick Hospital Center, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL CERIELLO, Appellant, v. BRUNSWICK HOSPITAL CENTER, INC., et al.…

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

Date published: Jan 16, 1990

Citations

157 A.D.2d 701 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
549 N.Y.S.2d 800

Citing Cases

Roth v. Schneider

Furthermore, the plaintiff had a full opportunity to examine the attorney panel member on his qualifications…

McAteer v. Arden Hill Hospital

Here, we find Supreme Court's limitations on examination reasonable and well within that court's discretion.…