Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Thomas W. EDSON, as Temporary Administrator of the Estates of Thomas W. Edson and Ruth G. Edson, Deceased, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. COMMUNITY GENERAL HOSPITAL OF GREATER SYRACUSE, Defendant-Appellant.
Plaintiff was appointed temporary administrator of the Estates of Thomas W. Edson (decedent) and Ruth G. Edson to pursue a complaint on their behalf against defendant, Community General Hospital of Greater Syracuse (Hospital). Decedent was admitted to the Hospital with general symptoms of weakness, disorientation, and fever. While still at the Hospital three days later, decedent awoke and, believing that he was at home, attempted to get out of bed and fell to the floor. Plaintiff alleged that the Hospital was aware of a potential for injury to decedent because of his fever and confusion. Supreme Court properly denied that part of the Hospital's motion seeking dismissal of the complaint as time-barred and granted that part of plaintiff's cross motion seeking dismissal of the Hospital's fourth, fifth, and sixth affirmative defenses. Contrary to the Hospital's contention, the complaint asserts a negligence cause of action, not a medical malpractice cause of action. The gravamen of the complaint is “the failure to exercise ordinary and reasonable care to insure that no unnecessary harm befell the patient” (Halas v. Parkway Hosp., 158 A.D.2d 516, 517, 551 N.Y.S.2d 279), and “the allegations of the complaint do not involve diagnosis, treatment or the failure to follow a physician's instructions” (Papa v. Brunswick Gen. Hosp., 132 A.D.2d 601, 603, 517 N.Y.S.2d 762; cf., Scott v. Uljanov, 74 N.Y.2d 673, 674-675, 543 N.Y.S.2d 369, 541 N.E.2d 398). The court also properly denied that part of the Hospital's motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The Hospital failed to meet its initial burden of establishing that it exercised reasonable care and diligence in providing for the safety of decedent and thus was not negligent as a matter of law (see generally, White v. Sheehan Mem. Hosp., 119 A.D.2d 989, 500 N.Y.S.2d 885).
Order affirmed without costs.
MEMORANDUM:
All concur, HURLBUTT, J., not participating.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: December 21, 2001
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)