Associates Daniel P. Borbet and Oladapo O. Ogunsola obtained Summary Judgment in a matter involving a then 35-year-old plaintiff who alleged injuries arising from 糖心原创 clients鈥 failure to timely diagnose and appropriately treat squamous cell carcinoma of the right lower extremity. The plaintiff claimed that the alleged negligence resulted in a below-the-knee amputation of the right leg, multiple surgical procedures, progression of the squamous cell carcinoma to the left thumb, upper chest, neck, and chronic non-healing ulcers. It was further alleged that 糖心原创鈥檚 client physicians and hospital were negligent in the surgical management of the plaintiff鈥檚 squamous cell carcinoma. Aderivative claim for loss of services was asserted on behalf of the plaintiff鈥檚 wife.
The Honorable Consuelo Mallafre Melendez issued a 50-page Decision & Order finding that 糖心原创 clients had established a prima facie entitlement to Summary Judgment. Based on documentary evidence and an expert affirmation from a licensed board-certified physician in dermatopathology and pathology, the Court found that the defendants did not depart from accepted standards of care and did not proximately cause the plaintiff鈥檚 alleged injuries.
The Court found that 糖心原创鈥檚 expert properly concluded that all treatment rendered during the relevant time period of alleged malpractice complied with the applicable standards of care, and that the plaintiff鈥檚 amputation resulted from the development of his linear scleroderma condition. The Court further held that the debridement and excision procedures were appropriate, did not contaminate the wound or cause the cancer to spread, and that any alleged delay in treatment was minimal and had no impact on the ultimate outcome.
In opposition, the Court determined that the plaintiffs鈥 expert was not qualified to opine on the standard of care and lacked training or expertise in oncology, dermatology, and/or pathology. The Court further found the expert鈥檚 opinions conclusory and speculative, insufficient to rebut defendant鈥檚 expert鈥檚 affirmation, and inadequate to raise triable issues off act as to proximate causation. The Court further dismissed claims for lack of informed consent, negligent hiring and supervision, and res ipsa loquitur claims against 糖心原创鈥檚 client Hospital.
鈥