Legal Opinion · Dissent

Heidt v. Rome Memorial Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided December 27, 2000Published

1DissentLawton, J.

I respectfully dissent. In denying in *787part the motions and cross motion of all defendants except Rory Tropp, M.D. (defendants), Supreme Court concluded that defendant care givers could be held liable in damages for the catastrophic injuries received by the infant, who was physically abused by his father. The court concluded that defendants could be liable for medical malpractice because they each allegedly failed to diagnose the infant’s fractured rib on an earlier admission. Plaintiff does not seek damages for the alleged misdiagnosis that occurred on August 11, 1996; rather, he seeks…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Pulka v. EdelmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
  2. Eiseman v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
  3. Koeppel v. ParkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  4. Kempster v. Child Protective ServicesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
  5. Marquez v. Presbyterian HospitalNew York Supreme Court · 1994

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API