Bustos v Lenox Hill Hosp.

Bustos v Lenox Hill Hosp. 2011 NY Slip Op 00432 Decided on January 27, 2011 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 January 27, 2011
Gonzalez, P.J., Sweeny, Acosta, Freedman, Abdus-Salaam, JJ.
4128 107925/04

[*1]Maria Pilar Bustos, et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents,

v

Lenox Hill Hospital, et al., Defendants-Appellants, Dr. "John" Chan, etc., Defendant.




Garson DeCorato & Cohen, LLP, New York (Erin M. Hargis
of counsel), for appellants.
Hill & Moin, LLP, New York (Cheryl Eisberg Moin of
counsel), for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan B. Lobis, J.), entered October 23, 2009, which granted plaintiffs' motion to renew a prior order, same court and Justice, entered May 14, 2009, inter alia, granting defendants-appellants' motion for summary judgment, and upon renewal, denied the motion, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Under the particular circumstances presented, the affidavit of plaintiff's expert was properly considered by the court on renewal (see Mejia v Nanni, 307 AD2d 870, 871 [2003]; Garner v Latimer, 306 AD2d 209 [2003]; Tishman Constr. Corp. of N.Y. v City of New York, 280 AD2d 374, 376-377 [2001]). The affidavit was sufficient to raise triable issues of fact as to whether defendants' treatment of plaintiff before and during delivery
departed from good and accepted standards of obstetric care (see Roques v Noble, 73 AD3d 204 [2010]; Frye v Montefiore Med. Ctr., 70 AD3d 15 [2009]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDEROF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: JANUARY 27, 2011
DEPUTY CLERK