Legal Opinion
Kaplan v. Karpfen
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 30, 2008PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to defendants’ demonstration of their entitlement to summary judgment. Their experts’ opinions that the infant plaintiff suffered traumatic brain injury either during birth or shortly thereafter were conclusory and speculative (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324-325 [1986]; Bullard v St. Barnabas Hosp., 27 AD3d 206 [2006]). While these opinions were based in large part on the presence of a cephalohematoma noted a few days after the birth, none of plaintiffs’ experts contested the assertions of defendants’ experts…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Alvarez v. Prospect HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Romano v. StanleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1997
- Bullard v. St. Barnabas HospitalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Browder v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
3Cited by5 opinions
- Diaz v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2024
- Diaz v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2024
- Fortich v. Ky-MiyasakaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Siegal v. AdlerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
- Fortich v. Ky-MiyasakaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013