Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law 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
In Lanzetta v. Montefiore Medical Center, the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court reversed earlier rulings that granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, including Dr. Howard Hochster and Montefiore Medical Center. The court reinstated the plaintiff's medical malpractice claim concerning the treatment of the decedent, Pasquale Lanzetta, which allegedly contradicted his health care directives. Key points from the case include: - The decedent had established a health care proxy and a living will in 1993, directing his agents to withhold life-prolonging treatment in the event of terminal illness. - A new health care proxy was completed in 2016, appointing his daughter as the primary agent and directing aggressive life-saving measures. - On April 7, 2017, a "Forgoing Life-Sustaining Treatment" (FLST) form was signed, indicating the decedent's wishes not to be resuscitated. - The decedent was informed of his terminal condition on April 15, 2017, yet he continued to receive treatment until his death on May 6, 2017. - The plaintiff, as executor, argued that the defendants breached their duty by administering treatments that prolonged the decedent's life, contrary to his directives. 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issues regarding which health care proxy governed the decedent's treatment decisions, whether the 2016 proxy had been revoked, and whether the treatment indeed prolonged his life. The absence of expert affidavits from either party left these questions open, necessitating a trial to resolve them. The order was entered on November 17, 2022.