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.
Sean Akash MONSELS, etc., respondent, v. Yvonne SINCLAIR, et al., defendants, Anthony Royek, etc., et al., appellants.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for medical malpractice, the defendants Anthony Royek and Steven Salmieri appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (R. Doyle, J.), dated March 5, 2007, as denied those branches of the motion of the defendants Anthony Royek, Steven Salmieri, Allen Monheit, and Edmond La Gamma, which were for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendants Anthony Royek and Steven Salmieri.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The Supreme Court correctly determined that the defendants Anthony Royek and Steven Salmieri (hereinafter the defendants) were not entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them. In opposition to the defendants' prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the infant plaintiff adduced sufficient evidence to raise triable issues of fact, inter alia, as to whether the defendants' alleged failure to prescribe antibiotics for his mother, Krishna Mohan, to treat gram-negative infections prior to her delivery of him was a departure from accepted standards of care. The motion and opposition papers raised credibility issues between the plaintiff's and the defendants' experts, and issues of credibility are properly left to a jury for resolution (see Barbuto v. Winthrop Univ. Hosp., 305 A.D.2d 623, 760 N.Y.S.2d 199; Stoves v. City of New York, 293 A.D.2d 666, 741 N.Y.S.2d 269; Halkias v. Otolaryngology-Facial Plastic Surgery Assoc., 282 A.D.2d 650, 724 N.Y.S.2d 432). In light of the conflicting medical expert opinions, the defendants were not entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them (see Barbuto v. Winthrop Univ. Hosp., 305 A.D.2d 623, 760 N.Y.S.2d 199; Zarzana v. Sheepshead Bay Obstetrics & Gynecology, 289 A.D.2d 570, 735 N.Y.S.2d 627; Bennett v. Knipfing, 262 A.D.2d 260, 692 N.Y.S.2d 403; Weissman v. Wider, 235 A.D.2d 474, 652 N.Y.S.2d 1006).
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: June 03, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)