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 POLKA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MOUNT ST. MARY'S HOSPITAL OF NIAGARA FALLS, Marc Klementowski, M.D., and Kyle R. Andrews, as Administrator of the Estate of Renee Buckley-Bleiler, P.A., Deceased, Defendants-Respondents.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order and judgment so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, defendants' motions for a directed verdict are denied, the complaint is reinstated and a new trial is granted in accordance with the following memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this medical malpractice action against defendants, Mount St. Mary's Hospital of Niagara Falls (hospital), Marc Klementowski, M.D., and Kyle R. Andrews, as administrator of the estate of Renee Buckley-Bleiler, P.A., deceased, seeking damages for alleged negligence in the treatment of plaintiff's right ear. We agree with plaintiff that Supreme Court erred in granting defendants' motions for a directed verdict. Plaintiff presented expert testimony establishing that Buckley-Bleiler, who examined plaintiff in the hospital's emergency room on the night in question, should have recognized and diagnosed plaintiff with a middle ear infection based upon, inter alia, plaintiff's complaints at that time. Also according to plaintiff's experts, Buckley-Bleiler's negligence caused or contributed to plaintiff's profound hearing loss. Furthermore, plaintiff established through the testimony of one expert that Klementowski, the supervising physician in the emergency room at the time, should have realized upon reviewing plaintiff's chart that plaintiff had a serious infection. Based on the expert testimony presented by plaintiff, it cannot be said that “it would ․ be utterly irrational for a jury to reach [a verdict in favor of plaintiff]” (Cohen v. Hallmark Cards, 45 N.Y.2d 493, 499, 410 N.Y.S.2d 282, 382 N.E.2d 1145 [1978]). We therefore reverse the order and judgment, deny defendants' motions for a directed verdict and grant a new trial before a different justice.
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.
Docket No: 436
Decided: October 02, 2020
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)