Opinion
# 2016-032-504 Claim No. 107609
07-06-2016
RODERICK REYES v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Roderick Reyes, Pro Se Hon. Eric T. Schneiderman, NYS Attorney General By: Michael T. Krenrich, Assistant Attorney General, Of Counsel
Synopsis
Following a trial, claimant's medical negligence claim is dismissed based upon his failure to provide expert testimony.
Case information
| UID: | 2016-032-504 |
| Claimant(s): | RODERICK REYES |
| Claimant short name: | REYES |
| Footnote (claimant name) : | |
| Defendant(s): | THE STATE OF NEW YORK |
| Footnote (defendant name) : | |
| Third-party claimant(s): | |
| Third-party defendant(s): | |
| Claim number(s): | 107609 |
| Motion number(s): | |
| Cross-motion number(s): | |
| Judge: | JUDITH A. HARD |
| Claimant's attorney: | Roderick Reyes, Pro Se |
| Defendant's attorney: | Hon. Eric T. Schneiderman, NYS Attorney General By: Michael T. Krenrich, Assistant Attorney General, Of Counsel |
| Third-party defendant's attorney: | |
| Signature date: | July 6, 2016 |
| City: | Albany |
| Comments: | |
| Official citation: | |
| Appellate results: | |
| See also (multicaptioned case) |
Decision
Claimant, an inmate proceeding pro se, filed the instant claim on April 14, 2003, alleging that he received inadequate medical care while incarcerated at Coxsackie Correctional Facility. Specifically, claimant alleges that, between about 11:30 p.m. on May 22, 2001 and 6:30 a.m. on May 23, 2001, he suffered a medical emergency in his cell due to a preexisting medical condition, namely, sickle cell anemia (Claim ¶ 5). Claimant alleges that, although he repeatedly alerted the block officer on duty "that he was having severe chest, back, and hip pain" and that he suffered from sickle cell anemia, he did not receive treatment for seven hours and suffered extreme pain during that time (Claim ¶¶ 5-12). Claimant further alleges that, although the on-duty nurse reported that claimant was suffering solely from back pain on the night in question, the log book reveals that the block officer informed the nurse that claimant "was complaining of back and chest pain and was having trouble breathing" (Claim ¶ 17).
A trial on the issue of liability was conducted on April 14, 2016 at the Court of Claims in Albany, New York. Claimant testified on his own behalf and offered several exhibits in support of his claim. Defendant did not call any witnesses and did not submit any evidence. At trial, claimant testified, in relevant part, that the facility's delay in administering medical treatment caused him to endure seven hours of unnecessary pain and suffering and threatened his life. Claimant further stated that the facility's protocol requires that inmates complaining of chest pain receive emergency medical treatment, and that, due to a misunderstanding among on-duty staff as to whether he exhibited chest pain on the night in question, such treatment was withheld. In support of his claim, claimant has submitted, among other things, his ambulatory health record from May 23, 2001 and his discharge papers from Albany Medical Center. Claimant testified that, upon admission to the infirmary at 6:30 a.m. the next morning, he was diagnosed as being in sickle cell crisis and was given Demerol and Vistaril for pain in his back and legs. Claimant was then admitted to Albany Medical Center for a period of one week, where he was placed on intravenous hydration and received Demerol every 3-4 hours for pain.
"It is fundamental law that the State has a duty to provide reasonable and adequate medical care to the inmates of its prisons" (Rivers v State of New York, 159 AD2d 788, 789 [3d Dept 1990], lv denied 76 NY2d 701 [1990]; accord Auger v State of New York, 263 AD2d 929, 931 [3d Dept 1999]). "Where an inmate alleges that defendant abdicated its duty to provide adequate medical care, he or she must present competent evidence demonstrating defendant's common-law negligence or that it departed from accepted standards of care and that such deviation was the proximate cause of the sustained injuries" (Knight v State of New York, 127 AD3d 1435, 1435 [3d Dept 2015]). "Whether the claim is grounded in negligence or medical malpractice, where medical issues are not within the ordinary experience and knowledge of lay persons, expert medical testimony is a required element of a prima facie case" (Myers v State of New York, 46 AD3d 1030, 1031 [3d Dept 2007] [internal quotations and citations omitted]; see Knight v State of New York, 127 AD3d at 1435; Wood v State of New York, 45 AD3d 1198, 1198 [3d Dept 2007]).
Upon application of these principles to the facts presented here and considering claimant's testimony and demeanor at trial, the Court finds that he has failed to establish, by a preponderance of the credible evidence, his claim against defendant.
Claimant alleges that the facility's staff were negligent for failing to administer emergency medical treatment when he complained of chest pain and difficulty breathing on the night of May 22, 2001, particularly in light of his history of sickle cell anemia. However, claimant presented no expert testimony on this issue. Specifically, the Court received no expert testimony describing the proper procedures for the treatment of sickle cell anemia, and no expert testimony establishing that the treatment that claimant received on the morning of May 23, 2001 was inappropriate. As such information lies outside the experience and knowledge of a layperson, the Court finds claimant's failure to present expert testimony to be fatal to this claim (see Tolliver v State of New York, 133 AD3d 990, 991 [3d Dept 2015], lv denied 26 NY3d 919 [2016]; Myers v State of New York, 46 AD3d at 1031; Wood v State of New York, 45 AD3d at 1198). Further, claimant's allegation that defendant violated its own protocol by failing to administer emergency medical treatment when he complained of chest pain is unpersuasive in light of the lack of documentation in the record to support such a claim.
Based upon the foregoing, the Court concludes that claimant has failed to satisfy his burden to prove medical negligence. Defendant's motion to dismiss the claim, made at trial and upon which the Court reserved decision, is now granted and the claim is dismissed. Any motions made at trial upon which the Court had previously reserved or which remain undecided are denied.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly.
July 6, 2016
Albany, New York
JUDITH A. HARD
Judge of the Court of Claims