Articles Posted in Uncategorized

In a case involving medical malpractice, conversion, and fraud, David Greuner filed a motion for summary judgment under CPLR 3212. Greuner argued that the plaintiff, Maria Liberatore, lacked standing because her claims were assets of her Chapter 7 Bankruptcy trustee. He also contended that her medical malpractice and conversion claims were barred by the statute of limitations, and her fraud claim was duplicative of the medical malpractice claim.

A statute of limitations sets the maximum time after an event within which legal proceedings can be initiated. In New York, for medical malpractice claims, including those involving injuries or death, the statute of limitations is two years and six months from the date of the alleged act, omission, or improper treatment. This time limit is crucial, as failing to file a claim within this period can result in the loss of the right to seek compensation. However, there are exceptions, such as tolling the statute for insanity, which requires a showing of mental incapacity that prevented the plaintiff from understanding their legal rights.

Background Facts

Rabinovich v. Maimonides Med. Ctr., 179 A.D.3d 88 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019) involves the distinction between ordinary negligence and medical malpractice. The determination impacts requirements related to CPLR 3012-a, which requires a certificate of merit in medical malpractice actions.

Background Facts

On August 13, 2015, the plaintiff donated blood at a blood donation center in Brooklyn. After leaving the center, she had an adverse reaction, lost consciousness, fell, and sustained injuries. On September 18, 2017, she filed an action against the center. The defendant responded, demanding a complaint, which the plaintiff provided, detailing the alleged negligence. The defendant’s answer included ten affirmative defenses, one of which was the plaintiff’s failure to file a certificate of merit as required by CPLR 3012-a.

In a medical malpractice case where the patient dies, both wrongful death and conscious pain and suffering claims are relevant and often pursued simultaneously. The wrongful death claim addresses the long-term impact on the surviving family members, providing them with financial compensation for their loss. Meanwhile, the conscious pain and suffering claim focuses on the decedent’s experience, compensating for the distress and pain endured before death. By pursuing both types of claims, the decedent’s estate and family can seek full compensation for the broad spectrum of losses and suffering resulting from the medical malpractice.

In In re Delmoro, the New York Surrogate’s Court addressed the distribution of proceeds from a wrongful death settlement. The case involved the estate of Ronald A. Delmoro, who passed away in 2009 due to medical malpractice. The court’s decision highlighted the complexities in applying the Kaiser formula, a standard method for distributing wrongful death proceeds, and emphasized the need for equitable considerations in such matters.

The Kaiser formula, established in Matter of Kaiser, 198 Misc. 582, 100 N.Y.S.2d 218 (1950), is a method used in wrongful death cases to allocate proceeds among a decedent’s surviving spouse and children. It calculates each distributee’s share based on their years of anticipated dependency. The formula’s denominator is the sum of these years for all eligible distributees, while the numerator for each distributee is their individual years of anticipated dependency. This fraction determines the proportion of the settlement they receive. The formula aims to simplify distribution but may not always yield equitable results, as it doesn’t consider each distributee’s unique circumstances.