Matthew Gaier

February 05, 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 the rendering of a jury verdict represents the culmination and resolution of what is often weeks of intense work by all litigants in a malpractice action. However, those efforts may be negated in the moments it takes the foreperson to read the verdict, if the result is internally inconsistent.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

14 minute read

June 05, 2007 | New York Law Journal

Thomas A. Moore, senior partner at Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore, and Matthew Gaier, a partner at the firm, write that in addition to basic malpractice, potential claims stemming from organ donations and transplants can involve unique areas of potential liability, raising issues of whether a duty is owed to nonpatients, and liability based upon malfeasance, where a person in need of an organ does not receive it due to negligence.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

12 minute read

April 05, 2005 | New York Law Journal

Thomas A. Moore, a senior partner with Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore, and Matthew Gaier, a partner with the firm, analyze a recent case which has potentially significant consequences with respect to the rights of parties to out-of-court settlements and may require practitioners to alter the manner in which they effectuate settlements.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

10 minute read

April 03, 2007 | New York Law Journal

Thomas A. Moore, senior partner at Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore, and Matthew Gaier, a partner at the firm, review recent cases under Public Health Law �2801-d, which establishes grounds for liability that might not otherwise be actionable and adds to the value of cases by setting minimum amounts of damages and providing for punitive damages, which can lead to the prosecution of meritorious cases which might not otherwise be economically feasible.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

13 minute read

August 05, 2002 | New York Law Journal

I N THE JUNE 1998 edition of this column in The New York Law Journal, we analyzed the law addressing the extent to which the courts of this state may exercise personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state health care provider who negligently injures a New York State resident during the course of treatment rendered outside the state. 1 Inspired by a recently published opinion, we revisit that subject in this month`s column.

By Thomas A. Moore And Matthew Gaier

12 minute read

December 01, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Thomas A. Moore, senior partner of Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore, and Matthew Gaier, a partner with the firm, write that the potential ramifications of the Court of Appeals' decision in Fasso v. Doerr were far more onerous than the opinion recognized. By maintaining the right to recover should they not consent to settlements, health insurers were given considerable opportunity to thwart the will of the parties to settle unless they received the amount they demanded. The Legislature has now remedied these problems in the recently-passed Governor's Program Bill #95.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

11 minute read

December 07, 2010 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice column, Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore partners Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier write that fetal monitor strips, essentially a continuous recording of what was happening with the maternal contractions and the fetal heart rate at the time of birth, can be so crucial in cases where it is claimed that the fetus suffered a deprivation of oxygen during labor or delivery that over the past decade, a body of case law has developed over what should be done when they are missing.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

13 minute read

December 05, 2006 | New York Law Journal

Thomas A. Moore, a senior partner of Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore, and Matthew Gaier, a partner at the firm, explore the liability of treating physicians who testify against their patients. While the bringing of a medical malpractice action effects a waiver of privilege that precludes a claim for breach of confidentiality, treating doctors may still be held liable for breaching their fiduciary duty if they testify untruthfully against their patients.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

12 minute read

February 07, 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 decision-making by entire segments of the medical profession is susceptible to external financial influences which are not necessarily in the best interests of the patient. When this happens, that which may be considered to fall within "generally accepted medical practice" may nevertheless be negligent.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

12 minute read

October 06, 2009 | New York Law Journal

Thomas A. Moore, senior partner at Kramer, Dillof, Livingston & Moore, and Matthew Gaier, a partner at the firm, write that in an apparent effort to gain bipartisan support for health care reform legislation, President Barack Obama has been espousing the view that changes should be made to curtail medical malpractice litigation. While he has disavowed "caps" on damages, they say, he has expressed support for imposing other measures that may, even if unintentionally, have the effect of harming malpractice victims.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

12 minute read