From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gatto v. Cooper

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 7, 1994
201 A.D.2d 455 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

February 7, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Coppola, J.).


Ordered that the judgments are affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The plaintiffs contend that the jury's verdict in favor of the defendants must be set aside as against the weight of the evidence. However, upon our review of the record, we cannot conclude that the verdict could not have been reached by any fair interpretation of the evidence adduced at trial (see, Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 N.Y.2d 493; Nicastro v. Park, 113 A.D.2d 129). Therefore, we will not disturb the verdict.

Nor do we find any error in the court's charge regarding the defendant doctor's prescription of a dosage of Thorazine in excess of the dosage recommended by its manufacturer in the Physician's Desk Reference (hereinafter PDR). The court properly instructed the jurors that the administration of a dosage of medication in excess of the PDR's recommendation constitutes evidence of a deviation from accepted medical standards, but that it was for them to determine, based upon the circumstances of this case, whether the defendant doctor acted reasonably in prescribing the higher dosage (see, Paul v. Boschenstein, 105 A.D.2d 248; see also, Mulder v. Parke Davis Co., 288 Minn. 332, 181 N.W.2d 882). The charge requested by the plaintiffs was properly rejected since it misstated the applicable law.

The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Sullivan, J.P., Pizzuto, Joy and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Gatto v. Cooper

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 7, 1994
201 A.D.2d 455 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Gatto v. Cooper

Case Details

Full title:RONALD GATTO et al., Appellants, v. KENT P. COOPER et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Feb 7, 1994

Citations

201 A.D.2d 455 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
607 N.Y.S.2d 372

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…