Woehrle v. Buono: NY Court Reinstates Medical Malpractice Claim

Brad Woehrle filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against Dr. Lawrence M. Buono and Dr. James A. Brady, alleging that a surgical procedure resulted in permanent vision loss in his left eye. The case stemmed from an orbital biopsy performed by one or both doctors. The key issue was whether Buono acted as the primary surgeon or merely assisted Brady.

Buono testified that he only assisted in the procedure, while Brady claimed that Buono performed the biopsy. Additionally, Brady later edited the operative report, but there was no evidence that the edit was made to evade liability.

The defendants moved for summary judgment, seeking dismissal of the claims. The trial court granted their motions, dismissing the medical malpractice claim against Buono and rejecting punitive damages claims against both defendants. Woehrle appealed the ruling.

Appellate Court’s Decision

The New York Appellate Division modified the lower court’s decision, reinstating the medical malpractice claim against Buono while affirming the dismissal of punitive damages claims against both doctors. The court ruled:

• Buono failed to establish that he was only an assistant and not the primary surgeon. The conflicting testimony and medical records created a factual dispute that required resolution at trial.
• The expert opinion submitted in support of Buono’s motion did not adequately address whether he performed the biopsy or whether his alleged departure from accepted medical practice was a proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injury.
• Brady’s conduct in editing the operative report did not rise to the level of moral culpability required for punitive damages, as there was no evidence of an intent to evade liability.
• The allegations against Buono amounted to negligence, which is insufficient to support a punitive damages claim.

Since the defense did not eliminate all triable issues of fact, the court ruled that a jury should determine whether Buono committed malpractice.

Implications for Medical Malpractice Cases

This ruling highlights key principles in medical malpractice litigation:

• Summary judgment is not appropriate when factual disputes exist regarding a physician’s role in a procedure.
• Inconsistent testimony and medical records can create triable issues that must be resolved by a jury.
• Punitive damages require more than negligence; they require evidence of willful misconduct or moral culpability.
• Physicians should ensure that operative reports are accurate and complete to avoid disputes over their involvement in a procedure.

Conclusion

The New York Appellate Division’s decision allows the medical malpractice claim against Buono to proceed to trial, reinforcing the importance of factual clarity in medical negligence cases. The ruling also reaffirms the high standard required for punitive damages in malpractice litigation.

Medical Malpractice Legal Support

If you need legal assistance with a medical malpractice claim, including issues related to surgical errors or professional negligence, contact us for experienced representation.