From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Prigorac v. Park

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jul 28, 2005
20 A.D.3d 363 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

5888.

July 28, 2005.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered January 16, 2004, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied and the complaint reinstated.

DiJoseph Portegello, P.C., New York (Arnold E. DiJoseph III of counsel), for appellant.

Peltz Walker, New York (Bhalinder L. Rikhye of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Buckley, P.J., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Saxe and Friedman, JJ. Concur.


In this dental malpractice action arising from a root canal performed by defendant, questions of fact are presented by the experts' conflicting opinions as to whether defendant departed from the prevailing standard of care and, if so, whether such departure resulted in plaintiff's injuries; and also by the parties' contradictory affidavits as to whether defendant had advised plaintiff of the possible need for retreatment by an orthodontist.


Summaries of

Prigorac v. Park

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jul 28, 2005
20 A.D.3d 363 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

Prigorac v. Park

Case Details

Full title:BERNADETTE PRIGORAC, Appellant, v. JACLYN PARK, DDS, Respondent

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

Date published: Jul 28, 2005

Citations

20 A.D.3d 363 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 6175
799 N.Y.S.2d 53

Citing Cases

Unger v. Stiber

Therefore, Dr. Subramanyam and the P.C.'s motion for summary judgment must be denied. See, Prigorac v.…

Rice v. W. 37th Grp., LLC

The requisite elements of proof in a medical or dental malpractice action are deviation or departure from…