Clark v. Dello Russo

2025 NY Slip Op 03038 · Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department · May 21, 2025 · No. Index No. 52111/17

Summary

This appellate decision reviews a trial court's denial of a defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 4404(a) to set aside a jury verdict in a medical malpractice action. The Appellate Division, Second Department reversed the judgment, granting the motion and dismissing the complaint against the defendants because the plaintiff's expert testimony failed to establish that the physician's failure to perform an eye culture was a substantial factor in causing the patient's injuries. The court held that there was no valid line of reasoning or permissible inference supporting the jury's finding of proximate cause.

Court
Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Writing for the Court
CHAMBERS, J.P.; WOOTEN, J.; VENTURA, J.; LOVE, JJ.
Jurisdiction
New York
Decision date
May 21, 2025
Docket number
Index No. 52111/17
Procedural posture
Appeal from Supreme Court, Westchester County judgment denying motion under CPLR 4404(a) and entering judgment for plaintiff.
Standard of review
law
Precedential value
Published
Parties
Gregory J. Pamel, et al. v. Nicole Clark
Disposition
reversed

Topics

professional negligenceappellate procedurecivil procedurestandard of review

Practice areas

tortscivil procedureappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a motion pursuant to CPLR 4404(a) to set aside a jury verdict should be granted where no valid line of reasoning supports the verdict
  2. Whether the defendant's failure to perform a culture was a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries

Holdings

  1. The motion is granted because there was no valid line of reasoning or permissible inferences that could lead a rational jury to the verdict; the judgment is reversed.
  2. The failure to perform a culture was not a proximate cause; therefore the jury's verdict was unsupported.

Key quotations

A motion pursuant to CPLR 4404(a) to set aside a jury verdict and for judgment as a matter of law will be granted where there is simply no valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which could possibly lead rational persons to the conclusion reached by the jury on the basis of the evidence presented at trial. (at 788)

Factual background

On September 9, 2014, defendant Jeffrey S. Dello Russo performed LASIK eye surgery on the plaintiff. The plaintiff later sought treatment from defendant Gregory J. Pamel for postoperative complications, including possible diffuse lamellar keratitis. The plaintiff was diagnosed with infectious keratitis and a jury found that Pamel failed to perform a culture, constituting a departure from the standard of care that was a substantial factor in the plaintiff's injuries.

Procedural history

The Supreme Court, Westchester County denied the defendants' motion pursuant to CPLR 4404(a) to set aside a jury verdict and for judgment as a matter of law, and entered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff for $790,000. The defendants appealed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…