The role of the courts in filtering medical malpractice claims figured prominently in a recent appellate ruling from Rochester, where a divided panel engaged in a spirited debate before allowing the claim to go to a jury.
Wilk v. James, 12-00577, an Appellate Division, Fourth Department, appeal decided on Friday, distilled to a dispute among the judges over whether the plaintiff had raised a factual issue for a jury, and a judgment call on what constitutes sufficient evidence in the framework of medical malpractice motion practice.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
