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.
DORETHA WILLIAMS, AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF STEVEN K. WILLIAMS, DECEASED, PLAINTIFF–RESPONDENT, v. RONALD M. MOSCATI, JR., M.D., ET AL., DEFENDANTS, AND ERIE COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER CORPORATION, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Plaintiff, as administratrix of the estate of her son (decedent), commenced this action seeking damages for his wrongful death and conscious pain and suffering allegedly caused by defendants' medical malpractice. Defendant Erie County Medical Center Corporation (ECMCC) appeals from an order insofar as it denied those parts of its motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the wrongful death claims against it. We affirm.
ECMCC correctly concedes that it may be held vicariously liable for the negligent acts of defendant Ronald M. Moscati, Jr., M.D., a private attending physician who treated decedent in ECMCC's emergency department (see generally Henderson v. Marx, 251 A.D.2d 988; Mduba v. Benedictine Hosp., 52 A.D.2d 450, 453). ECMCC contends, however, that Supreme Court erred in denying its motion with respect to its liability for the acts of defendant Erum Ansari, M.D., a fellow in pediatric emergency medicine who treated decedent under the supervision of Dr. Moscati. We reject that contention. Even assuming, arguendo, that ECMCC met its initial burden with respect to Dr. Ansari, plaintiff submitted an expert affidavit raising a triable issue of fact whether Dr. Ansari exercised medical judgment independent from that of Dr. Moscati (see generally Lorenzo v. Kahn, 74 AD3d 1711, 1713; Soto v. Andaz, 8 AD3d 470, 471; Pearce v. Klein, 293 A.D.2d 593). ECMCC further contends that the court erred in denying its motion with respect to its liability for the acts of ECMCC's staff. We reject that contention inasmuch as plaintiff has asserted no direct claims against ECMCC's staff.
Patricia L. Morgan
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: CA 11–00217
Decided: June 10, 2011
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)