NACHBAUR v. ST LUKE ROOSEVELT HOSPITAL CENTER

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Edwin NACHBAUR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ST. LUKE'S-ROOSEVELT HOSPITAL CENTER, Defendant-Respondent.

Decided: July 01, 1999

ROSENBERGER, J.P., WILLIAMS, MAZZARELLI, LERNER and BUCKLEY, JJ. Plaintiff-Appellant, Pro Se. Steven C. Mandell, for Defendant-Respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered April 8, 1998, which granted defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint as time-barred, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

 When applying a Statute of Limitations, courts look to the essence of the stated claim and not the label by which a plaintiff chooses to identify it (Meyer v. Shearson Lehman Bros., 211 A.D.2d 541, 542-543, 621 N.Y.S.2d 346).   Plaintiff's claims with respect to the two 1993 incidents are for battery, not medical malpractice, and, in any event, would be barred by the two and a half-year Statute of Limitations for medical malpractice.   With respect to the 1995 incident, the occurrences of which plaintiff complains-being beaten up by defendant hospital's security personnel and detained for a long period of time-were unrelated to any course of medical treatment, and, if anything, constitute causes of action for battery and false imprisonment (see, Restatement [Second] of Torts §§ 18, 35).   Plaintiff cannot avoid the one-year Statute of Limitations for these causes of action (CPLR 215[3] ) by arguing that there would have been no need for security personnel “but for” defendant's malpractice in refusing to refer him for physical therapy.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.