In last month’s column, which focused on the Appellate Division, First Department’s recent decision on continuous treatment in Devadas v. Niksarli, 120 A.D.3d 1000 (1st Dept. 2014), we noted that there have been several interesting Appellate Division decisions on the subject in the years since it had last been addressed in this column.1 Where applicable, the continuous treatment doctrine permits medical malpractice actions to be brought beyond the statutory two-and-a-half year period after the malpractice.
Devadas posed a somewhat unusual situation in that the continuity of treatment was premised, in part, on evidence that the defendant gave the plaintiff a lifetime guarantee relative to the operative procedure that was the subject of the malpractice claim. The other recent Appellate Division decisions of interest involve more typical circumstances. They are discussed in this month’s column.
This content has been archived.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]
