Weber v. Sharma: NY Court Partially Reinstates Malpractice Claims

The case arose from the treatment of Amanda Weber at Crystal Run Healthcare on January 18, 2018. She sought medical attention for chest pain, pressure, and upper extremity pain. She was first seen by Dr. Puja Sharma, a family practitioner, who conducted an examination and referred her to Dr. Viral Ras Sheth, a cardiologist at the same facility.

Dr. Sheth prescribed medication, directed a nurse to administer nitroglycerine, and advised a follow-up appointment. However, the medical records noted that Weber declined an emergency transfer for troponin testing, which detects heart damage. She returned home after her visit and suffered a fatal heart attack later that day.

Following her death, Brian Weber, individually and as executor of her estate, filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against Dr. Sharma, Dr. Sheth, and Crystal Run Healthcare. The defendants moved for summary judgment, seeking dismissal of the case, and the trial court granted their motion. Weber appealed the decision.

Appellate Court’s Decision

The New York Appellate Division modified the lower court's ruling, reinstating claims against Dr. Sheth and Crystal Run Healthcare while affirming the dismissal of claims against Dr. Sharma. The court based its ruling on the following key findings:

• Dr. Sharma did not deviate from accepted medical practice by referring Weber to a cardiologist after conducting tests.
• There were triable issues of fact regarding whether Dr. Sheth and Crystal Run Healthcare failed to properly advise Weber of the need for immediate emergency care.
• The Dead Man’s Statute, which prevents certain testimony about communications with a deceased person, applied to the depositions of Dr. Sharma and Dr. Sheth, limiting their admissibility.
• Medical records and testimony from a treating nurse were admissible, but they did not eliminate all factual disputes regarding Weber’s treatment and whether she was sufficiently informed of the urgency of her condition.

The appellate court found that the defendants had not met the burden to establish, as a matter of law, that no malpractice occurred in Weber’s treatment. Since factual issues remained, particularly regarding the adequacy of the medical advice given, the court ruled that a jury should determine liability for Dr. Sheth and Crystal Run Healthcare.

Implications for Medical Malpractice Cases

This decision underscores important considerations for medical malpractice claims in New York:

• Physicians may be held liable if they fail to adequately inform patients about the urgency of their medical condition.
• Summary judgment is not appropriate when expert medical opinions conflict on whether malpractice occurred.
• The Dead Man’s Statute can limit the admissibility of testimony from interested parties in cases involving deceased patients.
• Medical practices may be vicariously liable for the actions of their employees under the doctrine of respondeat superior.

Conclusion

The New York Appellate Division’s ruling allows claims against Dr. Sheth and Crystal Run Healthcare to proceed to trial, ensuring that key factual disputes will be resolved by a jury. The case highlights the challenges of summary judgment in medical malpractice litigation and reinforces the duty of healthcare providers to clearly communicate risks to patients.

Legal Guidance for Medical Malpractice Claims

Understanding patient rights and medical liability is essential in malpractice cases. If you need legal support regarding medical negligence or wrongful death claims, contact us for experienced guidance.