From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Neenan v. Kamalian

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 11, 2002
292 A.D.2d 433 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

01-00402

February 11, 2002

March 11, 2002.

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Slobod, J.), dated December 4, 2000, which, upon treating their motion to dismiss the complaint as a motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3211(e), denied the motion.

Law Offices of Irving O. Farber, PLLC, White Plains, N.Y. (Annette G. Hasapidis of counsel), for appellants.

James J. Herkenham, Slate Hill, N.Y., for respondents.

SONDRA MILLER, J.P., ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, STEPHEN G. CRANE, and BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.


ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

General Obligations Law § 15-108 abrogated the common-law rule that the release of an original tortfeasor barred a later action against a hospital or physician for any additional injuries resulting from the negligent treatment of the original injury (see Williams v. Niske, 81 N.Y.2d 437, 442; Hill v. St. Clare's Hosp., 67 N.Y.2d 72, 83). The release of one tortfeasor does not constitute a release of other tortfeasors claimed to be liable for the same injury unless the terms of the release expressly so provide (see, Utter v. South Brookhaven Obstetric Gynecologist Assocs., 135 A.D.2d 811, 812). Here, even if the injured plaintiff alleged the same injuries in the previous action against the original tortfeasor as she is alleging against the defendants in this case, this is not a basis for dismissing the complaint. Rather, General Obligations Law § 15-108 requires only that any recovery against the defendants for the same injuries, for which the injured plaintiff previously obtained recovery, be offset (see, Utter v. South Brookhaven Obstetric Gynecologist Assocs., supra). To determine the amount of any offset, a verdict must be rendered from which the total amount of the plaintiffs' damages can be ascertained, and then a hearing must be held pursuant to CPLR 4533-b (see, Utter v. South Brookhaven Obstetric Gynecologist Assocs., supra; Moller v. North Shore University Hosp., 12 F.3d 13, 17 [applying New York Law]).


Summaries of

Neenan v. Kamalian

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 11, 2002
292 A.D.2d 433 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Neenan v. Kamalian

Case Details

Full title:AGNES NEENAN, et al., RESPONDENTS, v. MICHAEL H. KAMALIAN, et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Mar 11, 2002

Citations

292 A.D.2d 433 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
738 N.Y.S.2d 889

Citing Cases

Mavashev v. New York City Transit Authority

General Obligations Law § 15-108 is applicable to both successive and joint tortfeasors (see Hill v. St.…

Dunbar v. Egol

the proper amount, as determined pursuant to [General Obligations Law § 15-108], from the award made by the…