Senior Partner William P. Brady obtained a dismissal on a summary judgment motion, or in the alternative, for a frye hearing in a case involving a plaintiff with Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS). The plaintiff alleged that our client doctor delayed the diagnosis and treatment by 24-36 hours. The Court found that our client doctor established that earlier diagnosis and treatment would not have changed the outcome. It was noted that plaintiff’s Neurology expert disagreed and opined that the delay resulted in a substantial contribution to plaintiff’s injuries. The Judge wrote that while conflicting expert opinions normally result in credibility determination to be decided at trial, in this case plaintiffs’ expert failed to support his conclusions through competent medical literature. Further, the Judge concluded that although Courts have allowed issues of causation to be determined by a jury even where an expert cannot quantify the extent to which a defendant’s conduct diminished the chances of a better outcome, those cases involve theories or opinions, unlike here, where the defendants opinion was supported by the medical literature. Accordingly, our motion for summary judgment was granted and the case dismissed, as plaintiff’s Neurology expert failed to raise triable issues of fact in response to the motion.