Opinion
14812, 112243/11
04-16-2015
Karen DOSANJH, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. SATORI LASER CENTER CORP., doing business as Satori Laser Hair Removal, Inc., Defendant–Appellant.
Barry, McTiernan & Moore, New York (David H. Schultz of counsel), for appellant. Siler & Ingber, LLP, Mineola (Maria Nanis of counsel), for respondent.
Barry, McTiernan & Moore, New York (David H. Schultz of counsel), for appellant.
Siler & Ingber, LLP, Mineola (Maria Nanis of counsel), for respondent.
MAZZARELLI, J.P., FRIEDMAN, MANZANET–DANIELS, CLARK, KAPNICK, JJ.
Opinion Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Manuel J. Mendez, J.), entered February 25, 2014, which granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.
Plaintiff seeks to raise the inference of negligence by the application of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. However, she failed to present expert evidence, or any other evidence, to establish that the burns she allegedly suffered as the result of a laser hair removal treatment were the kind of injuries that ordinarily do not occur in the absence of negligence (see Seung Ja Cho v. In–Chul Song, 286 A.D.2d 248, 729 N.Y.S.2d 117 [1st Dept.2001], lv. denied 97 N.Y.2d 610, 739 N.Y.S.2d 357, 765 N.E.2d 853 [2002] ). Indeed, the “Treatment Consent and Release” she signed included among the risks of the treatment “discomfort, redness, [and] blistering,” which suggests that burns resulting in redness and scarring may be common side effects of laser hair removal. Without expert testimony or other evidence as to the standard of care in performing laser hair removal and the known risks of the procedure, there is no evidentiary basis for a conclusion that the presence of the burns inescapably demonstrates negligence (see Morejon v. Rais Constr. Co., 7 N.Y.3d 203, 212, 818 N.Y.S.2d 792, 851 N.E.2d 1143 [2006] ).