Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; May 1, 2014; New York; State Appellate Court
An appeal was made against a February 27, 2013, order from the Supreme Court in Albany County, which dismissed the complaint against defendants Danilo Cosico and Hakan Attaroglu. The plaintiff suffered injuries after falling from an operating table during or after extubation following surgery at Bellevue Women’s Care Center on June 25, 2009. The plaintiff initiated the lawsuit on June 25, 2012, three years later. Attaroglu, the anesthesiologist, argued the complaint was untimely, claiming it fell under medical malpractice, which has a 2.5-year statute of limitations. The plaintiff sought to amend the complaint to remove references to medical standards. Cosico, the assistant surgeon, similarly moved to dismiss the complaint as untimely.
The Supreme Court denied the plaintiff's amendment request and granted the defendants' motions to dismiss. The key legal question is whether the claims are categorized as medical malpractice, thus invoking the shorter statute of limitations, or as ordinary negligence, which has a three-year limit. Medical malpractice is defined as conduct related to medical treatment by a licensed physician. The complaint includes elements suggesting malpractice, such as the duty of care owed during surgery and the circumstances of the fall. However, it also contains indications that the fall could be attributed to negligence, such as the failure to assess safety or remove obstructions.
The court determined there was insufficient factual information to classify the complaint definitively as one of malpractice or negligence. Given that the plaintiff was under anesthesia and has not provided detailed accounts, the court denied the motions to dismiss based on the statute of limitations, allowing the defendants the option to renew their motions upon further factual development.
The Supreme Court denied the plaintiff's cross motion to amend the complaint after determining to dismiss the complaint. However, since the court is reversing the dismissal of the defendants’ motions, the denial of the plaintiff's cross motion is also reversed. The plaintiff is required to serve the amended complaint within 20 days of this decision. The court modified the order by reversing the parts that granted the defendants Hakan Attaroglu and Danilo Cosico's motions to dismiss and denied the plaintiff's cross motion. The motions to dismiss are denied for these defendants, the plaintiff's cross motion is granted, and the amended complaint must be served within the specified timeframe. The order is affirmed as modified. It is noted that the plaintiff previously agreed to discontinue the action against other defendants. The Supreme Court had dismissed the entire complaint, including against Bellevue and Ellis Hospital, despite these parties not moving for dismissal. On appeal, the plaintiff only challenged the dismissal of the defendants, leading to the abandonment of any arguments concerning Bellevue and Ellis Hospital.
