Practice point: As to the alleged failure to diagnose, defendant met his
initial burden through the affirmed report of his expert who noted that
decedent had no prior history of diabetes or elevated glucose during
the previous year and a half he had been treated by defendant, and
opined that defendant acted appropriately and within the standard of
care in performing a focused clinical examination when decedent
presented with a sore throat. In opposition, plaintiffs' expert's opinion that
defendant deviated from the standard of care relied on his statement
that decedent presented with a history of symptoms, including polyuria
and polydipsia. However, in the record there is no evidence that any such
history was presented to defendant, but rather to a hospital
two days later. To the extent plaintiffs' expert's opinion relied on
facts and evidence not in the record, plaintiffs' theory was without the requisite expert or record support.
Student note: As to the alleged improper treatment during the hospital stay, a physician's general duty of care may be limited to
those medical functions undertaken by the physician and relied upon by
the patient. Defendant was entitled to rely on the treatment
rendered in the hospital by specialists better equipped to
handle the patient's condition.
Case: Perez v. Edwards, NY Slip Op 04704 (1st Dept. 2013).
Here is the decision.
Tomorrow's issue: A failed fraud claim.
