From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schulman v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 9, 1996
226 A.D.2d 164 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Summary

In Schulman v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 226 A.D.2d 164 (N.Y.App.Div. 1996), the court found that the recipient of an erroneous diagnosis of Human Immunodeficiency Virus ("HIV") positive status stated a claim under the `guarantee of genuineness' theory of negligent infliction of emotional distress, but only after finding that defendants who administered the test owed a duty of care to the plaintiff.

Summary of this case from In re Air Crash at Belle Harbor

Opinion

April 9, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.).


The erroneous report of an HIV positive finding following blood analysis is a "`special circumstance'" that provides assurance that a claim to recover for negligent infliction of emotional distress as a result of the erroneous report is genuine and not spurious, and therefore plaintiff's claim may be maintained ( Johnson v. State of New York, 37 N.Y.2d 378, 382). It is clear that the defendants who handled the blood sample and issued the erroneous report owed a duty of care, under the circumstances herein, to this plaintiff, even in the absence of a direct relationship with him ( supra, at 382-383; see, McKinney v Bellevue Hosp., 183 A.D.2d 563, 565-566). Since the so-called Execumed defendants, enumerated above, had no connection to the vials of blood giving rise to the erroneous result, we modify to grant their cross-motion to dismiss.

We have considered the remaining defendants' additional contentions and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Milonas, Ross, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

Schulman v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 9, 1996
226 A.D.2d 164 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

In Schulman v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 226 A.D.2d 164 (N.Y.App.Div. 1996), the court found that the recipient of an erroneous diagnosis of Human Immunodeficiency Virus ("HIV") positive status stated a claim under the `guarantee of genuineness' theory of negligent infliction of emotional distress, but only after finding that defendants who administered the test owed a duty of care to the plaintiff.

Summary of this case from In re Air Crash at Belle Harbor

In Schulman, the erroneous report of a blood testing lab that plaintiff was HIV positive was deemed a special circumstance that provided a guarantee of genuineness allowing plaintiff to maintain a claim for AIDS phobia.

Summary of this case from Dougherty v. City of New York

In Shulman v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Amer., 226 A.D.2d 164, 164, 640 N.Y.S.2d 112 (N.Y.App.Div. 1996), the New York Appellate Division held that misdiagnosis of a patient as HIV-positive was actionable, where the doctor also disclosed the mistaken test results to plaintiff's partner.

Summary of this case from Doe v. Arts
Case details for

Schulman v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

Case Details

Full title:JEROME SCHULMAN et al., Respondents, v. PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF…

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

Date published: Apr 9, 1996

Citations

226 A.D.2d 164 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
640 N.Y.S.2d 112

Citing Cases

In re Air Crash at Belle Harbor

Id. In Schulman v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 226 A.D.2d 164 (N.Y.App.Div. 1996), the court found that the…

Catania v. Liriano

Thus, claimant is entitled to recover for that harm, especially if Supported by objective manifestations of…