LAKE v. Ram Prakash Sharma, M.D., and Lisa Hastings, C.R.N.A., Defendants-Appellants. (2009)

 Plaintiffs commenced this medical malpractice action seeking damages for back injuries allegedly sustained by Dale Lake (plaintiff) when he was moved and/or positioned in connection with a surgical procedure performed on his left thumb.   Supreme Court erred in denying the motion of Ram Prakash Sharma, M.D., the anesthesiologist, and Lisa Hastings, C.R.N.A., the anesthesia nurse (collectively, defendants), seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint against them.   Defendants met their initial burden by submitting the affidavit of an expert establishing that they did not deviate from accepted medical practice in their care and treatment of plaintiff (see Darling v. Scott, 46 A.D.3d 1363, 1364, 849 N.Y.S.2d 142).   Plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact by submitting the affidavit of an expert that contained only “[g]eneral allegations of medical malpractice, [which were] merely conclusory in nature and unsupported by competent evidence tending to establish the essential elements of [medical malpractice]” (Mendez v. City of New York, 295 A.D.2d 487, 488, 744 N.Y.S.2d 847;  see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 325, 508 N.Y.S.2d 923, 501 N.E.2d 572).   We further conclude that the record does not support plaintiffs' allegation that the alleged injuries to plaintiff could not occur in the absence of negligence and thus, contrary to plaintiffs' contention, the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur does not apply to defeat defendants' motion (see Hoffman v. Pelletier, 6 A.D.3d 889, 891, 775 N.Y.S.2d 397;  Sapienza v. County of Erie, 270 A.D.2d 907, 907-908, 705 N.Y.S.2d 455).

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the motion is granted and the complaint against defendants Ram Prakash Sharma, M.D. and Lisa Hastings, C.R.N.A. is dismissed.

MEMORANDUM: