FAILED TO SHOW HOW DOCTORS DEVIATED FROM THE STANDARD OF CARE
After her doctors failed to diagnose her “reflex symptomatic dystrophy,” M.T. filed suit with the New York County Supreme Court.
And when the doctors later sought dismissal of the case – via a motion for summary judgment – that request ended up getting denied.
On appeal, the Appellate Division, First Department, noted that the defendants’ papers “sufficiently stated” that they did not deviate from the “applicable standard of care.” And that M.T.’s response, was “conclusory” and “insufficient” to rebut those contentions nor triggered an “issue of fact” which warranted a formal trial.
Not only was M.T.’s expert report “redacted,” it failed to specify how the doctors supposedly deviated from established practice and neglected to detail the cause of M.T.’s injuries or to explain how an earlier diagnosis would have made a difference – that is, how it would have “prevented or lessened plaintiff's injuries.”
Given that deficiency, the AD1 “unanimously reversed,” and granted the doctors’ dismissal request.
Was her case repeatedly misdiagnosed here?
# # #
DECISION