From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Zelig v. Urken

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 13, 2006
28 A.D.3d 318 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

8282.

April 13, 2006.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered March 29, 2005, which granted defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint as time-barred, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Before: Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Nardelli, Catterson and Malone, JJ.


Plaintiff failed to demonstrate satisfactorily a mutual contemplation, with her physician, of further treatment between her last examination, on July 26, 2001, and a test performed on October 31 of that year, which would have tolled the statute of limitations and rendered timely the commencement of this medical malpractice action in March 2004. Notwithstanding plaintiff's reliance on defendant's notation in the medical record of July 26 that plaintiff was to continue to advance her diet and have a barium swallow test in two months, no appointment was ever scheduled, and defendant had no further contact with her ( cf. Richardson v. Orentreich, 64 NY2d 896). Plaintiff did not reveal, in her affidavit in opposition, the physician who had arranged for the barium swallow test, to whom the results were to be forwarded ( cf. Adams v. Frankel, 242 AD2d 595).

Even if defendant expected plaintiff to return, she did not meet her burden in providing facts to support her claim that she intended to continue treatment with this physician. There is no basis in the record for concluding that an uninterrupted course of treatment continued between the parties after July 26, 2001, and thus the action was properly dismissed as time-barred under CPLR 214-a ( see Bellmund v. Beth Israel Hosp., 131 AD2d 796; see also De Peralta v. Presbyterian Hosp., 121 AD2d 346).


Summaries of

Zelig v. Urken

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 13, 2006
28 A.D.3d 318 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

Zelig v. Urken

Case Details

Full title:ROSALYN ZELIG, Appellant, v. MARK L. URKEN, M.D., Respondent

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

Date published: Apr 13, 2006

Citations

28 A.D.3d 318 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 2817
813 N.Y.S.2d 77

Citing Cases

Wei v. Westside Women's Med. Pavilion, P.C.

In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact as to whether the continuous treatment doctrine…

Viniello v. N.Y.C. Health & Hosps. Corp.

Although the medical records reflect that plaintiff presented to Bellevue several times during this period,…