John L.A. Lyddane

March 10, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice Defense column, John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg write that the impact of the "collateral source rule" and the increasing availability of services for disabled persons have significantly limited the prospects for recovery in cases where it is claimed a failure to detect a fetal abnormality while a pregnancy could be legally terminated leads to the birth of a disabled child, and it is anticipated that with the advent of the Affordable Care Act, the range of recoverable damages will be further diminished.

By John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg

13 minute read

March 09, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice Defense column, John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg write that the impact of the "collateral source rule" and the increasing availability of services for disabled persons have significantly limited the prospects for recovery in cases where it is claimed a failure to detect a fetal abnormality while a pregnancy could be legally terminated leads to the birth of a disabled child, and it is anticipated that with the advent of the Affordable Care Act, the range of recoverable damages will be further diminished.

By John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg

13 minute read

January 21, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice Defense column, John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg write: Punitive damage claims remain the rare exception rather than the rule in medical malpractice actions. The likely reason, as the Appellate Division has expressly recognized, is that "[a] doctor in a malpractice case is ordinarily not an actor who intends to inflict an injury on his patient."

By John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg

15 minute read

January 20, 2015 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice Defense column, John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg write: Punitive damage claims remain the rare exception rather than the rule in medical malpractice actions. The likely reason, as the Appellate Division has expressly recognized, is that "[a] doctor in a malpractice case is ordinarily not an actor who intends to inflict an injury on his patient."

By John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg

15 minute read

December 16, 2014 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice Defense column, John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg discuss a series of cases that indicates that it is only where a hospital's employees, on the basis of their own common knowledge and experience, are aware that an intended course of treatment is "clearly contraindicated by normal practice" that they may be under an obligation to intervene in the care of patients of private attending physicians.

By John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg

13 minute read

September 16, 2014 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice Defense column, John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg write: Because medical care providers are more attuned to medical emergencies than laypeople are, a notion has crept into New York law to the effect that the emergency doctrine is somehow less available in the context of evaluating the response of a nurse or doctor faced with a medical emergency.

By John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg

14 minute read

May 23, 2014 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice Defense column, John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg discuss the "collateral source" rule, which provides for reduction of an award for pecuniary loss by the amount of collateral source payments such as insurance or disability benefits, and how the Affordable Care Act may factor into future determinations.

By John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg

15 minute read

April 11, 2014 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice Defense column, Martin Clearwater & Bell's John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg write: Although the "missing witness charge" is frequently discussed and requested in cases where a party's examining physician is not produced at trial, the principle has a much broader application given the myriad factual issues presented by a medical malpractice case.

By John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg

13 minute read

February 11, 2014 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice Defense column, John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg of Martin Clearwater & Bell write: It is familiar law that, ordinarily, physicians' or hospital records are admissible to the extent they are germane to treatment, but that details of how a particular injury allegedly occurred are not relevant and subject to redaction. A recent trial illustrates how a complex underlying fact pattern can complicate the issue of hearsay in medical records.

By John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg

11 minute read

November 15, 2013 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice Defense column, John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg of Martin Clearwater & Bell write: Imposition of liability for medical malpractice almost always requires the existence of a physician-patient relationship. Those situations in which a physician's duty extends to a non-patient are few and narrowly circumscribed, and often involve allegations of a failure to warn of risks to the third party caused by the treatment of the patient.

By John L.A. Lyddane and Barbara D. Goldberg

13 minute read