You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Lanzetta v. Montefiore Med. Ctr.

Citation: 2022 NY Slip Op 06554Docket: Index No. 27712/19E Appeal No. 16701-,16701A-,16701B Case No. 2021-01401, 2021-03674

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; November 16, 2022; New York; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

In the case of Lanzetta v. Montefiore Medical Center, the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court reversed a lower court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants, Dr. Howard Hochster and Montefiore Medical Center. The plaintiff, serving as the executor of the decedent, Pasquale Lanzetta, brought a medical malpractice claim alleging that the defendants violated the decedent’s health care directives by administering life-prolonging treatment despite his expressed wishes to the contrary. The decedent had executed a health care proxy and a living will in 1993, and later in 2016, which presented conflicting instructions regarding life-sustaining measures. Additionally, a form signed on April 7, 2017, further complicated the directives by indicating a preference against resuscitation. The court found that significant factual disputes remained, particularly concerning which health care proxy should govern the treatment and whether the 2016 proxy was revoked. The absence of expert affidavits contributed to the court's decision to vacate the summary judgment, necessitating a trial to address these unresolved issues. As a result, the medical malpractice claim was reinstated, allowing further judicial examination of the circumstances surrounding the decedent's treatment and the validity of the directives.

Legal Issues Addressed

Medical Malpractice and Health Care Directives

Application: The case examines whether the defendants adhered to the decedent’s health care directives, specifically regarding life-prolonging treatment.

Reasoning: The plaintiff, as executor, argued that the defendants breached their duty by administering treatments that prolonged the decedent's life, contrary to his directives.

Summary Judgment Standards in Medical Malpractice

Application: The Appellate Division determined that summary judgment was inappropriate due to unresolved factual issues requiring a trial.

Reasoning: The court found unresolved factual issues... The absence of expert affidavits from either party left these questions open, necessitating a trial to resolve them.

Validity of Health Care Proxies

Application: The court addressed the issue of which health care proxy should have governed the decedent's treatment decisions.

Reasoning: The court found unresolved factual issues regarding which health care proxy governed the decedent's treatment decisions, whether the 2016 proxy had been revoked, and whether the treatment indeed prolonged his life.