The plaintiffs filed their New York medical malpractice action against Nadezhda Krebs, Natela Abramov, and Mount Sinai Hospital of Queens (“Mount Sinai”) alleging that they deviated from the accepted standard of medical care by clearing the plaintiffs’ decedent for general anesthesia despite her chronic lung disease and alleged evidence of infection at the time of surgery. Krebs, Abramov, and Mount Sinai moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them. In an order dated January 27, 2020, the New York Supreme Court denied that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action alleging medical malpractice insofar as asserted against Krebs and Mount Sinai.
The defendants moved for leave to reargue that branch of their prior motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action alleging medical malpractice insofar as asserted against them. In an order dated February 23, 2021, the New York Supreme Court granted leave to reargue, and, upon reargument, in effect, vacated the determination in the order dated January 27, 2020, denying that branch of their prior motion, and thereupon granted that branch of their prior motion. The plaintiffs appealed from the order dated February 23, 2021.
In New York, a defendant moving for summary judgment in a medical malpractice action must demonstrate the absence of any material issues of fact with respect to at least one of the elements of a cause of action alleging medical malpractice: (1) whether the physician deviated or departed from accepted community standards of practice, or (2) whether such a departure was a proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. Once a defendant has made such a showing, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate the existence of a triable issue of fact as to the elements on which the defendant met the prima facie burden.
The Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department held in its Decision & Order dated April 9, 2025: “Here, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants leave to reargue (see CPLR 2221[d]) and, upon reargument, properly granted that branch of their prior motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action alleging medical malpractice insofar as asserted against them. The defendants established, prima facie, that they did not depart from accepted standards of care, thereby demonstrating their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law … In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact. The plaintiffs’ expert affidavit relied upon facts that were not supported by the record and failed to address specific opinions offered by the defendants’ expert. The plaintiffs’ expert report was thus speculative, conclusory, and insufficient to defeat that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action alleging medical malpractice insofar as asserted against the defendants.”
Source Rani v. Chaudhry, 2021-01773.
If you or a loved one suffered harm due to negligent clearance for surgery in New York or in another U.S. state, you should promptly find a New York medical malpractice attorney or a medical malpractice attorney in your state who may investigate your surgery clearance medical malpractice claim for you and represent you or your loved one in a surgery clearance medical malpractice case, if appropriate.
Click on the “Contact Us Now” tab to the right, visit our website, or call us toll-free in the United States at 800-295-3959 to find hospice malpractice lawyers in your state who may assist you.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.
