Matthew Gaier

April 06, 2010 | New York Law Journal

Thomas A. Moore, senior partner of Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore, and Matthew Gaier, a partner at the firm, write: Because there can sometimes be numerous health care providers involved in the subject treatment in a medical malpractice action, a defense counsel may be blessed with many potential "empty chairs" to try to blame in order to reduce the apportionment to his client. This risk compels plaintiffs to cast a wide net in naming defendants in malpractice suits, and necessarily increases the number of defendants named - an ironic result from legislation passed as "tort reform."

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

14 minute read

June 03, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Thomas A. Moore, senior partner at Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore, and Matthew Gaier, a partner at the firm, write that it has been eight years since they last addressed Medicaid liens. During that time there have been important changes in the law that have substantially altered the landscape with regard to such liens. The most important development has been the U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in Ahlborn, which overturned onerous state decisional law.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

13 minute read

February 02, 2010 | New York Law Journal

Thomas A. Moore, senior partner of Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore, and Matthew Gaier, a partner at the firm, write that once the court has approved a compromise order, providing for the collection and allocation of the settlement proceeds in a case involving an injured infant or incompetent plaintiff, there often remain significant matters concerning the appropriate legal and financial vehicles for using and protecting the child's assets.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

11 minute read

April 01, 2008 | New York Law Journal

Thomas A. Moore, a senior partner at Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore, and Matthew Gaier, a partner at the fim, write that a recent Second Circuit ruling is truly a refreshing and enlightened decision that may provide sorely needed relief from grossly unfair circumstances that have deprived many malpractice victims from pursing the merits of their claims and obtaining just compensation.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

15 minute read

May 05, 2003 | New York Law Journal

By Thomas A. Moore And Matthew Gaier

9 minute read

June 07, 2011 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice column, Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore's Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier review a recent Second Department decision holding that a plaintiff is required to establish the existence of an issue of fact as to causation in opposition to summary judgment only after a moving defendant has satisfied its burden on that issue by submitting proof that its malpractice did not cause any injury.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

11 minute read

October 04, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Thomas A. Moore, senior partner at Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore, and Matthew Gaier, a partner at the firm, review the wide range of decisions in which the courts have attempted to harmonize prior New York common law and newer constraints imposed by federal legislation regarding ex parte interviews by defense counsel of a plaintiff's subsequent treating physicians.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

13 minute read

August 01, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Thomas A. Moore, senior partner at Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore, and Matthew Gaier, a partner at the firm, write that it is standard practice in medical malpractice actions for the defense to obtain discovery regarding the plaintiff's physical condition from before and after the claimed malpractice. Less common are the instances in which plaintiffs obtain discovery regarding a defendant's medical or psychological condition. However, while not routine, such discovery can be obtained.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

13 minute read

December 07, 2004 | New York Law Journal

Thomas A. Moore, a senior partner at Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore, and Matthew Gaier, a partner at the firm, write that it is a fundamental tenet of medical malpractice law that in assessing whether a defendant has departed from the standards of good and accepted practice, the state of medical knowledge to be applied is that which was in existence at the time of the events in question.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

9 minute read

August 04, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Thomas A. Moore, senior partner of Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore, and Matthew Gaier, a partner at the firm, write that the Court of Appeals in 2007 sanctioned defense counsel's ex parte interviews of a plaintiff's treating physicians and required plaintiffs to execute authorizations permitting them. That decision has spawned a litany of related issues, one of which was recently resolved by the Appellate Division in Porcelli v. Northern Westchester Hosp. Ctr.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

13 minute read