From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vincini v. Insel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 3, 2003
1 A.D.3d 351 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2002-08638

Argued October 9, 2003.

November 3, 2003.

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, etc., the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Belen, J.), dated June 24, 2002, as granted those branches of the motion of the defendants Herbert A. Insel, Michael Krumholz, and Lenox Hill Hospital which were for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendants Michael Krumholz and Lenox Hill Hospital.

Raymond A. Raskin, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant.

Martin, Clearwater Bell, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Michael H. Zhu, Patricia D'Alvia, and Nancy Breslow of counsel), for respondents.

Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, those branches of the motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendants Michael Krumholz and Lenox Hill Hospital are denied, and the complaint is reinstated against those defendants.

The defendants Dr. Michael Krumholz and Lenox Hill Hospital failed to establish their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the basis of the conclusory affidavit of their expert witness ( see Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 N.Y.2d 851, 853; Drago v. King, 283 A.D.2d 603; Allen v. Blum, 212 A.D.2d 562). Therefore, it was unnecessary to reach the sufficiency of the papers submitted in opposition to the motion ( see Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., supra; cf., Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 324; Drago v. King, supra; Allen v. Blum, supra).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in granting those branches of the motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against Krumholz and Lenox Hill Hospital.

ALTMAN, J.P., SMITH, FRIEDMANN and CRANE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Vincini v. Insel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 3, 2003
1 A.D.3d 351 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Vincini v. Insel

Case Details

Full title:CARMELA VINCINI, ETC., appellant, v. HERBERT A. INSEL, ETC., ET AL.…

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

Date published: Nov 3, 2003

Citations

1 A.D.3d 351 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
766 N.Y.S.2d 569

Citing Cases

Wall v. Flushing Hosp

The defendants' expert's affirmation failed to address all of these allegations, and his opinions were…

Von Stackelberg v. Goldweber

Among other deficiencies, the affirmations of Dr. Pollack and Dr. Schnall are each conclusory and speculative…