In Mathura v. Makaryus, the New York Appellate Division reversed a lower court's decision and dismissed medical malpractice claims against multiple physicians and a hospital. The decision rested on findings that certain defendants did not have a physician-patient relationship with the decedent, and that others met their burden for summary judgment while the plaintiff failed to raise triable issues of fact.
Timeline of Events and Care Provided
Kumar Mathura first visited Gulati & Goyal, LLP on July 17, 2015, for flu-like symptoms and received antibiotics from Dr. Vinod Gulati. He returned on July 21 and was seen by Dr. Mohammud Alam, who referred him to another hospital. Mathura was later admitted to Plainview Hospital on July 23, presenting with cough and shortness of breath. Examinations were conducted by Drs. Mohsen Pahlavan, Sanjiv Sharma, and Elena Schmuter, who initiated various tests and treatment protocols over the next few days.
By July 26, Mathura's condition worsened. He was transferred to the intensive care unit and later treated by Dr. Mina Makaryus, who ordered additional testing and antifungal medication. Mathura passed away on the morning of July 29, 2015. His wife filed a lawsuit for medical malpractice against the hospital and the treating physicians.
Summary Judgment Granted for All Defendants
Each defendant moved for summary judgment, submitting deposition transcripts, the plaintiff's bill of particulars, and expert affirmations. Drs. Alam and Gulati established that they had no knowledge of the decedent’s hospitalization until it was nearly over or already concluded, showing they lacked a physician-patient relationship during the relevant period.
The hospital, along with Drs. Pahlavan, Sharma, and Schmuter, supported their motions with expert affirmations that no departure from accepted standards occurred and that any alleged omissions did not cause the decedent’s death. The court found these expert opinions sufficient to meet the defendants' burden.
The plaintiff responded with opposing expert affirmations, but the court determined they were speculative and lacked support from the record. Without specific and supported counterclaims, the court concluded the plaintiff failed to raise triable issues of fact. The Appellate Division reversed the lower court and dismissed all malpractice claims against the defendants.
Medical Malpractice Defense Review
If you are involved in a claim involving medical care standards or are defending against an allegation of malpractice, our team at Whitcomb, Selinsky, PC can review the facts of your case and evaluate the supporting evidence in line with legal standards.
Joe Whitcomb
