From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Trinidad v. Lantigua

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 4, 2003
2 A.D.3d 163 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Summary

affirming Bransten, J.

Summary of this case from FAAS v. HEYMANN

Opinion

2393.

December 4, 2003.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered on or about July 10, 2003, which, upon the grant of plaintiff's motion for renewal, inter alia, denied defendants' previously granted motion for summary judgment and granted plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint to add a cause of action for wrongful death, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Michael A. Freeman, for Plaintiff-Respondent.

Timothy J. O'Shaughnessy, for Defendants-Appellants.

Before: Tom, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Ellerin, JJ.


The issue of whether plaintiff should have been granted renewal to submit a certified death certificate in support of her proposed cause of action for wrongful death has been waived by defendants' failure to appeal from the prior order denying plaintiff leave to amend "without prejudice" to a subsequent motion for the same relief supported by a certified death certificate ( see Moleon v. Kreisler Borg Florman Gen. Constr. Co., 304 A.D.2d 337).

Under the particular circumstances presented, the affidavit of plaintiff's expert, which plaintiff's prior counsel inexplicably failed to submit, was properly considered by the court on renewal ( see Mejia v. Nanni, 307 A.D.2d 870). The affidavit was sufficient to raise a triable issue as to whether defendant doctor's treatment of the decedent comported with prevailing standards of professional medical care ( see Lambos v. Weintraub, 246 A.D.2d 356).

Dismissal of the action as time-barred insofar as it alleges malpractice prior to July 16, 1998 was properly denied. Particularly in view of defendant Lantigua's failure to keep treatment notes of the decedent's numerous visits to his office in the 1990s, there are outstanding factual issues as to whether Lantigua continuously treated the decedent for symptoms of the cancer he allegedly failed to timely diagnose at a time prior to July 16, 1998 ( see Hill v. Manhattan W. Med. Group-HIP, P.C., 242 A.D.2d 255).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Trinidad v. Lantigua

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 4, 2003
2 A.D.3d 163 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

affirming Bransten, J.

Summary of this case from FAAS v. HEYMANN

In Trinidad, the higher court categorized the circumstances as "peculiar" because an affidavit of plaintiff's expert along with a Death Certificate, both sufficient to create issues of fact in this medical malpractice case, had inexplicably not been submitted to the court when the defendants' motion was originally heard.

Summary of this case from Grobman v. Sobel
Case details for

Trinidad v. Lantigua

Case Details

Full title:DAISY TRINIDAD, ETC., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. RAFAEL LANTIGUA, M.D., ET…

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

Date published: Dec 4, 2003

Citations

2 A.D.3d 163 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
767 N.Y.S.2d 618

Citing Cases

U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Thompson

Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered February 4, 2016, which granted plaintiff's motion for a…

Smith v. City of N.Y.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, courts have nevertheless carved an exception to the general rule and a motions…