Craig v St. Barnabas Nursing Home

Craig v St. Barnabas Nursing Home 2015 NY Slip Op 05611 Decided on June 30, 2015 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on June 30, 2015
Tom, J.P., Acosta, Andrias, Moskowitz, Clark, JJ.
15566 302109/11

[*1] Chaqulia Craig, as Administrator of the Estate of Lillie B. Johnson, etc., Plaintiff-Appellant,

v

St. Barnabas Nursing Home, Defendant-Respondent.

Sinel & Associates, PLLC, New York (Judith E. Crumpton of counsel), for appellant.

Garbarini & Scher, P.C., New York (William D. Buckley of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered November 20, 2013, which granted defendant nursing home's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this action alleging violations of Public Health Law §§ 2801-d and 2803-c, as well as causes of action for medical malpractice, negligence, and wrongful death, the nursing home made a prima facie showing of its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting, among other things, its expert affirmation and medical records (Negron v St. Barnabas Nursing Home, 105 AD3d 501 [1st Dept 2013]). The medical records support the nursing home's expert's opinion that decedent's skin ulcers and other complications were unavoidable and the result of preexisting conditions, as well as other risk factors (id.).

In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact. Plaintiff submitted a conclusory and speculative affirmation of an unnamed expert who failed to mention the decedent's existing health conditions contributing to the ulcers, her comatose state, or that she had end-stage failure of her critical organs, including the skin (see id.). Moreover, the affirmation contained numerous [*2]misstatements of law and fact, and the expert failed to establish that he or she was qualified to opine on the care rendered at the nursing home (Guzman v 4030 Bronx Blvd. Assoc., L.L.C., 54 AD3d 42, 48 [1st Dept 2008]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: JUNE 30, 2015

CLERK