From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barone v. Flynn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 18, 2001
284 A.D.2d 422 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Argued April 9, 2001.

June 18, 2001.

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Berry, J.), dated May 25, 2000, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Steinberg Symer, LLP, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Ellen Fischer Bopp of counsel), for appellant.

Dominick J. Robustelli, White Plains, N.Y. (Alexander V. Sansone of counsel), for respondents.

Before: CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, NANCY E. SMITH, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.


ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant established a prima facie case of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see, Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 324). In opposition, the plaintiffs submitted the affirmation of the treating orthopedic surgeon, raising a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendant's alleged failure to detect and treat a tear in the anterior cruciate ligament of the right knee of the injured plaintiff constituted medical malpractice. Therefore, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment (see, Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., supra; Holbrook v. United Hosp. Med. Ctr., 248 A.D.2d 358; Taylor v. St. Vincent's Med. Ctr. of Richmond, 236 A.D.2d 461).

O'BRIEN, J.P., S. MILLER, SMITH and CRANE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Barone v. Flynn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 18, 2001
284 A.D.2d 422 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Barone v. Flynn

Case Details

Full title:PETER J. BARONE, ET AL., respondents, v. JOHN B. FLYNN, JR., ETC.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 18, 2001

Citations

284 A.D.2d 422 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
726 N.Y.S.2d 690

Citing Cases

Rosarky v. Rifkin

The Supreme Court properly denied the appellant's cross motion for summary judgment. After the appellant made…