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.
Gruen v. Brathwaite
Citation: 2023 NY Slip Op 02107Docket: 2019-09502
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; April 26, 2023; New York; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
In Gruen v. Brathwaite (2023 NY Slip Op 02107), decided on April 26, 2023, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York reviewed an appeal by Linda Gruen and her husband concerning medical malpractice and lack of informed consent claims against Winthrop University Hospital. The plaintiffs alleged that hospital staff failed to diagnose and treat Gruen's post-operative infection, resulting in severe complications, including a stroke and blindness, and that informed consent was not obtained prior to surgery. The Supreme Court, Suffolk County, initially granted the hospital's motion for summary judgment dismissing the medical malpractice claim on May 8, 2019, while denying the motion regarding the lack of informed consent claim. Upon reargument, the court reaffirmed its dismissal of the medical malpractice claim in a January 6, 2020 order. The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal from the May 8 order as it was superseded by the January 6 order and affirmed the latter, awarding costs to the hospital. To establish medical malpractice liability, the court reiterated that a plaintiff must demonstrate the defendant's deviation from accepted medical standards and that this deviation caused the injuries. In Keun Young Kim v. Lenox Hill Hospital, the court addressed a motion for summary judgment regarding a medical malpractice claim. The defendant hospital successfully established a prima facie case by presenting detailed affirmations from two expert witnesses: a general surgeon and a radiologist. The surgeon confirmed that both pre-operative evaluation and post-operative care adhered to accepted medical standards, noting that complications arose only after the hospital's appropriate referral to an emergency room on March 31, 2011. The radiologist concluded that the hospital's actions did not cause the plaintiff's injuries. As the hospital met its initial burden, the onus shifted to the plaintiffs to provide sufficient evidence demonstrating a triable issue of fact. However, the court found the plaintiffs' expert affidavit inadmissible due to insufficient detail regarding the expert's qualifications, despite the plaintiffs' argument that the expert's New Jersey licensure alone did not render the affidavit inadmissible. The plaintiffs failed to address the qualifications issue on appeal, which led to the abandonment of their argument. Consequently, the court upheld the summary judgment in favor of the hospital concerning the medical malpractice claim and declined the hospital's request for summary judgment on the informed consent claim.