Scheinin v Monas

Annotate this Case
Scheinin v Monas 2019 NY Slip Op 07865 Decided on October 31, 2019 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on October 31, 2019
Friedman, J.P., Kapnick, Kern, Singh, JJ.
10261 302216/16

[*1] Joanne Scheinin, etc., et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents,

v

Habib Monas, M.D., et al., Defendants, Bronx Harbor Health Care Complex Inc., doing business as Kings Harbor Multicare Center, Defendant-Appellant.



Kaufman Borgeest & Ryan LLP, Valhalla (David Bloom of counsel), for appellant.

Meagher & Meagher, P.C., White Plains (Merryl F. Weiner of counsel), for respondents.



Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Robert T. Johnson, J.), entered on or about May 25, 2018, which, to the extent appealed from, denied defendant Bronx Harbor Health Care Complex Inc. d/b/a Kings Harbor Multicare Center's (Kings Harbor) motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

Kings Harbor, the rehabilitation center to which plaintiff was transferred after surgery and hospitalization, was entitled to summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's complaint against it. In opposition to this defendant's motion, plaintiff's expert failed to identify any symptom or condition, which, if reported to plaintiff's physicians, would have expedited their diagnosis and treatment. Accordingly, plaintiff's expert failed to demonstrate that Kings Harbor deviated from accepted medical practice and that such failure was a proximate cause of plaintiff's death (see Bartolacci-Meir v Sassoon, 149 AD3d 567, 571-573 [1st Dept 2017]; Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 325 [1986]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: OCTOBER 31, 2019

CLERK



Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.