Krembs v NYU Langone Hosps.

Summary

The New York Appellate Division, First Department modified and otherwise affirmed orders in a medical malpractice action. The court upheld denial of an extension to serve NYU School of Medicine, dismissal of the informed-consent and ostensible-agency claims, and denial of consolidation, but reinstated the claim alleging Complex Regional Pain Syndrome because defendants failed to make a prima facie showing for summary judgment. The decision was issued per curiam.

Holdings

1. The denial of plaintiff's motion under CPLR 306-b for an extension of time to file and serve the supplemental summons, amended verified complaint, and certificate of merit was proper because an extension in the interest of justice was not warranted under the circumstances.
2. NYU Langone Hospitals was not vicariously liable under an ostensible-agency theory because the record established that plaintiff knew before arriving at the hospital that Dr. Michael L. Smith would perform the surgery.
3. Defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's informed-consent claim because the evidence established that plaintiff was advised of the reasonably foreseeable risks and offered specific nonsurgical alternatives.
4. Defendants were not entitled to summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's claim premised on Complex Regional Pain Syndrome because they failed to make a prima facie showing that plaintiff did not suffer from that condition.
5. The denial of plaintiff's motion to consolidate was proper because the actions involved disparate medical procedures, time periods, records, and witnesses and were at substantially different stages of litigation.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiff was entitled to an extension of time under CPLR 306-b to serve NYU School of Medicine.
2. Whether NYU Langone Hospitals could be held vicariously liable under an ostensible-agency theory.
3. Whether defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's informed-consent claim.
4. Whether defendants established prima facie entitlement to summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's claim premised on Complex Regional Pain Syndrome.
5. Whether the two actions should be consolidated under CPLR 602(a).

Disposition

other