Senior Trial Partners Thomas A. Mobilia and Jacqueline D. Berger, with the assistance of Appellate Partner Richard Wolf, successfully obtained Summary Judgment in Queens County Supreme Court on behalf of MCB's client Hospital and attending general surgeon. Plaintiff's claims focused on the improper placement and delay in removal of an intrauterine device (IUD) placed by the co-defendant private attending gynecologist. The IUD was found to be outside the uterus and the co-defendant scheduled surgical removal at the Hospital approximately 7 month safter the malposition of the device was discovered. Intraoperatively, -defendant found the IUD embedded in the bowel and called in our client general surgeon to assist, who removed the IUD and performed a colon resection due to a perforation of the colon. Plaintiff was readmitted to the Hospital several days later due to a wound infection.
In the support of the Motion for Summary Judgment, MCB submitted an Expert Affirmation by a General Surgeon asserting that the standards of care were met by our clients and that the wound infection is a known and accepted risk of any procedure involving a bowel perforation. Co-defendant opposed our Motion with Expert Affirmations and also moved to add cross-claims to their Answer to assert negligence against MCB’s clients, contending, inter alia, that the general surgeon failed to order appropriate antibiotic coverage after the colon resection resulting in the wound infections. In Reply, we argued that these were new claims never raised by plaintiff or co-defendant prior to this Opposition and should not be considered.
The Court agreed with our position, finding that co-defendant's experts failed to raise any triable issues of fact and offered opinions that were speculative and conclusory. Accordingly, the Court granted our Motion for Summary Judgment, dismissing the case against MCB's clients in its entirety. The Court further held that the cross-claims could not be asserted by co-defendant as it was prejudicial to our clients.