From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Weinreb v. Rice

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 30, 1999
266 A.D.2d 454 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

Submitted October 15, 1999

November 30, 1999

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Driscoll, J.), entered August 24, 1998, which, upon an order of the same court dated June 24, 1998, granting the defendant's motion for summary judgment, dismissed the complaint.

Richard Frank, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Kathleen Peratis of counsel), for appellant.

Shaub, Ahmuty, Citrin Spratt, LLP, Lake Success, N.Y. (Steven J. Ahmuty, Jr., and Barry T. Bassis of counsel), for respondent.

CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, ANITA R. FLORIO, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The decedent, Joel Weinreb, was under the psychiatric care of the defendant, Dr. Julius Rice, for depression and agitation. While hospitalized for injuries received in a fall, the decedent stated that he wanted to die. The defendant conducted a psychiatric evaluation and concluded that he was not suicidal. During the week following his discharge from the hospital, the defendant maintained contact with the decedent through the decedent's wife, the plaintiff Janet Weinreb. The decedent committed suicide seven days after being discharged from the hospital.

It is well settled that a physician may not be held liable for a mere error in professional judgment ( see, Ibguy v. State of New York, 261 A.D.2d 510; [2d Dept., May 17, 1999]; Darren v. Safier, 207 A.D.2d 473; Davitt v. State of New York, 157 A.D.2d 703; Mohan v. Westchester County Med. Center, 145 A.D.2d 474; Wilson v. State of New York, 112 A.D.2d 366). For liability to ensue, it must be shown that the physician's treatment decision was "something less than a professional medical determination" ( see, Ibguy v. State of New York, supra; Darren v. Safier, supra; Davitt v. State of New York, supra). There is no evidence that the defendant's decision on July 3, 1994, to discharge the decedent, change his medication, and follow his condition was something less than a professional medical determination. The mere fact that the plaintiff's expert would have opted for a different treatment, without more, "represents, at most, a difference of opinion among physicians, which is not sufficient to sustain a prima facie case of malpractice" ( see, Ibguy v. State of New York, supra; Darren v. Safier, supra; see also, Topel v. Long Is. Jewish Med. Center, 55 N.Y.2d 682).

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.

O'BRIEN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, FLORIO, and FEUERSTEIN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Weinreb v. Rice

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 30, 1999
266 A.D.2d 454 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Weinreb v. Rice

Case Details

Full title:JANET WEINREB, etc., appellant, v. JULIUS RICE, etc., respondent

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

Date published: Nov 30, 1999

Citations

266 A.D.2d 454 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
698 N.Y.S.2d 862

Citing Cases

Thomas v. Reddy

The Supreme Court, among other things, denied that branch of the motion. A psychiatrist may not be held…

Ozugowski v. City of New York

A psychiatrist is not required to achieve success in every case.’ Should a psychiatrist fail to predict that…