Thomas A Moore

December 04, 2017 | New York Law Journal

Medical Malpractice columnists Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier write: While recovery for negligent infliction of emotional distress is limited in New York, one area in which such claims have long been permitted involves the interference with the right to the body of a deceased loved one. This right, which exists at common law, is known as the right of sepulcher. A surprising number of actions have been brought against hospitals based upon violations of that right

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

16 minute read

October 02, 2017 | New York Law Journal

Medical Malpractice columnists Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier write: When someone is admitted to a hospital as the patient of a private attending physician, the hospital may still be subject to vicarious liability under the doctrine of ostensible agency for physicians who become involved in the patient's care during the admission. This question commonly arises with anesthesiologists and radiologists, although it may also apply where any physician is assigned by a hospital to provide a service or a consultation.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

15 minute read

July 31, 2017 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice column, Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier write: While it has long been recognized that a hospital is vicariously liable for the physicians it assigns to patients where a patient seeks treatment not from a particular physician, but from the hospital, some decisions have strictly imposed all of the requirements of ostensible agency. However, this circumstance is not purely one of ostensible agency. Rather, it is a distinct exception that involves aspects of both ostensible agency and agency-in-fact.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

15 minute read

June 05, 2017 | New York Law Journal

Medical Malpractice columnists Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier write: In addition to delays in diagnosing cancer, cases involving delays in diagnosing or treating cerebral vascular accidents such as strokes or bleeds commonly give rise to claims for loss of chance.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

13 minute read

April 03, 2017 | New York Law Journal

Medical Malpractice columnists Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier write that recovery for loss of chance—the diminution of an opportunity for a better outcome after a failure to diagnose—has long been a part of the fabric of malpractice actions in New York, but surprisingly, a question has been raised in recent years as to whether New York recognizes such recovery.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

28 minute read

February 06, 2017 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice column, Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier analyze the Court of Appeals' holding in 'Pullman v. Silverman', which emphatically confirmed the necessity for an expert affidavit to adequately refute the specific allegations in the bills of particulars to be sufficient to establish a moving defendant's entitlement to summary judgment.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

20 minute read

December 05, 2016 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice column, Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier review some of the principles that may be divined from the decisions interpreting CPLR 3101(d)(1)(i) relating to preclusion of expert testimony based upon untimely or insufficient disclosure, and discuss some Appellate Division decisions applying those principles in malpractice actions.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

28 minute read

October 03, 2016 | New York Law Journal

Medical Malpractice columnists Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier examine the Court of Appeals' recent decision in 'Mazella v. Beals', in which the court addressed issues pertinent to medical malpractice litigation, including the legal sufficiency of evidence of causation and the admissibility of a consent order stemming from charges relating to professional misconduct.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

20 minute read

August 22, 2016 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice column, Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier examine two Court of Appeals decisions affirming the denial of motions for late notices of claim on behalf of infants allegedly injured as a result of malpractice around the time of their birth.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

27 minute read

June 07, 2016 | New York Law Journal

In their Medical Malpractice column, Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier write: The Second Circuit recently issued a particularly noteworthy opinion addressing damages in an action involving malpractice at a VA medical center. That decision has important ramifications for cases stemming from care rendered at VA facilities, but also has portentous implications for damages-related issues in other federal and state malpractice actions.

By Thomas A. Moore and Matthew Gaier

15 minute read