Breitman v Dennett

Breitman v Dennett 2010 NY Slip Op 07402 [77 AD3d 498] October 19, 2010 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Rachel Breitman, Respondent,
v
Jay A. Dennett, M.D., Appellant.

—[*1] Belair & Evans LLP, New York (James B. Reich of counsel), for appellant.

Gerald J. Mondora, Rye Brook, for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered December 21, 2009, which, denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant dermatologist failed to establish his prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law in this action alleging medical malpractice. Defendant submitted an affidavit which stated that during his treatment of plaintiff, he did not deviate from good and accepted medical practices. However, it failed to address plaintiff's essential factual allegations, namely, whether the keloid defendant treated was or was not the same lesion that proved to be cancerous (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]; Kotler v Swersky, 10 AD3d 350 [2004]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, Acosta, Abdus-Salaam and RomÁn, JJ.