From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Perez v. Riverdale Family Med. Practice, P.C.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Nov 21, 2019
177 A.D.3d 554 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

10431 10431A Index 20839/10E

11-21-2019

Meghan Ann PEREZ, as Administratrix of the Estate of Prudence Wehmeyer, Deceased, and Meghan Ann Perez, Individually, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. RIVERDALE FAMILY MEDICAL PRACTICE, P.C., et al., Defendants, New York Presbyterian Hospital, et al., Defendants–Appellants.

Aaronson Rappaport Feinstein & Deutsch, LLP, New York (Dierdre E. Tracey of counsel), for appellants. Kahn Gordon Timko & Rodriques, P.C., New York (Nicholas I. Timko of counsel), for respondent.


Aaronson Rappaport Feinstein & Deutsch, LLP, New York (Dierdre E. Tracey of counsel), for appellants.

Kahn Gordon Timko & Rodriques, P.C., New York (Nicholas I. Timko of counsel), for respondent.

Friedman, J.P., Renwick, Oing, Singh, JJ.

Orders, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lewis J. Lubell, J.; George J. Silver, J.), entered October 11, 2018 and April 16, 2019, which denied the motion of defendants New York Presbyterian Hospital and Mark Silberman, M.D. (collectively NYPH) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

NYPH established prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. NYPH submitted evidence showing that it did not commit medical malpractice in the treatment of decedent when she presented at the emergency room with complaints of back pain.

In opposition, plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact by submitting a nonconclusory opinion by a qualified expert (see Diaz v. New York Downtown Hosp., 99 N.Y.2d 542, 544, 754 N.Y.S.2d 195, 784 N.E.2d 68 [2002] ). Plaintiffs' expert failed to profess personal knowledge of the standard of care in the field of emergency medicine, whether acquired through practice, studies or in some other manner (see Nguyen v. Dorce, 125 A.D.3d 571, 572, 5 N.Y.S.3d 30 [1st Dept. 2015] ). In any event, the expert offered only conclusory assertions and mere speculation that decedent's aortic dissection would have been successfully diagnosed and treated had NYPH referred her for a pulmonary or cardiac consult (see Rivera v. Greenstein, 79 A.D.3d 564, 568–569, 914 N.Y.S.2d 94 [1st Dept. 2010] ). Plaintiffs' expert did not refute the opinion of NYPH's expert that decedent's clinical picture supported the diagnosis of musculoskeletal pain, and decedent did not exhibit the classic symptoms of aortic dissection to warrant further investigation (see David v. Hutchinson, 114 A.D.3d 412, 980 N.Y.S.2d 38 [1st Dept. 2014] ; Zeldin v. Michaelis, 105 A.D.3d 641, 963 N.Y.S.2d 650 [1st Dept. 2013] ).


Summaries of

Perez v. Riverdale Family Med. Practice, P.C.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Nov 21, 2019
177 A.D.3d 554 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

Perez v. Riverdale Family Med. Practice, P.C.

Case Details

Full title:Meghan Ann Perez, as Administratrix of the Estate of Prudence Wehmeyer…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Nov 21, 2019

Citations

177 A.D.3d 554 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
112 N.Y.S.3d 728
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 8514

Citing Cases

Zanni v. Gomori

The Court finds that based upon her reliance on the affidavit of Plaintiff's Expert, Plaintiff has failed to…

Weitz v. Merck & Co.

General and conclusory allegations of malpractice are insufficient to defeat summary judgment, and…