Longtemps v. Oliva


New York Law Journal

   | 0 Comments    | SEE FULL TEXT OPINION

Justice Robert J. Muller

In this medical malpractice action, infant plaintiff Longtemps injured his foot after stepping on a board with a nail sticking out. He saw plastic surgeon Oliva, and then podiatrist Sarnow. Plaintiff alleged defendant doctors deviated from accepted standards of medical care during the periods of treatment by failing to timely and properly diagnose a "pseudomonas infection." He argued these deviations were causally related to the advancement of extensive osteomyelitis of the left calcaneus, and the need for bone grafting to repair the destroyed calcaneus. Defendants' experts opined the care rendered conformed to the standard of good, accepted medical care, claiming any alleged injury was not proximately caused by the care rendered by defendants. The court found plaintiff's expert's affirmation did not raise a triable issue of fact as to either Oliva or Sarnow in that the standard of care he defined, if followed, would have reasonably led to a different outcome. Accordingly, the court granted Oliva's and Sarnow's motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against them in its entirety.

Welcome to ALM. You have read 0 out of 0 free articles this month

Get 2 months of unlimited access FREE

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202582759701

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.