Of course, it must be pointed out that the cross-movant would have good cause for its late motion in that situation, and the cross motion would be evaluated on its merits (see e.g. An MRI of his cervical spine taken the same day found "severe central canal and severe neural foraminal stenosis," resulting in "severe myelomalacia of the spinal cord" from C3 to mid-C5 level. Plaintiff cites no precedent for imposing liability under these circumstances, and no comparable New York case has been located. Some decisions also reason that because CPLR 3212(b) gives the court the power to search the record and grant summary judgment to any party without the necessity of a cross motion, the court may address an untimely cross motion at least as to the causes of action or issues that are the subject of the timely motion (see Filannino, 34 AD3d at 281, citing Dunham v Hilco Constr. In other words, Brill calls on the courts to lead by enforcing the words of the statute, rather than let attorney practice slowly eat away at the integrity of our judicial system. You can explore additional available newsletters here. dr michael cross leaving hss. If the issue had been compression, surgery would have been performed to prevent further progression, but due to the degeneration of the spinal cord, decompressive laminectomies would have done little or nothing to address plaintiff's upper extremity issues. See times, locations, directions & contact information for Dr. Michael Cross in Indianapolis, IN. Altschuler, in turn, relied on a pre-Brill decision, James v Jamie Towers Hous. Plaintiff's expert does not even address the question of whether, taking plaintiff's obviously compromised physical condition into account, it was a departure from good and accepted medical practice to pursue a conservative course of treatment rather than assume the risk of surgical intervention. Cross M.D - Orthopaedic Surgeon - Home | Facebook PDF Expert Opinion provided by Dr. Michael Cross Brill emphasizes that summary judgment is advantageous to the parties by "avoiding needless litigation cost and delay" and constitutes "a great benefit both to the parties and to the overburdened New York State trial courts" since it "may resolve the entire case" (Brill, 2 NY3d at 651). Accordingly, the Court of Appeals refused to address the motion on its merits, pursuant to CPLR 3212(a). Lapin relied on Altschuler v Gramatan Mgt., Inc. (27 AD3d 304 [1st Dept 2006]), which held it proper to consider the untimely "cross motion," in particular because it was "largely based" on the same arguments raised in the timely motion for summary judgment, and the same findings would apply for both it and the timely motion. florida math book ban examples - foyerhub.com According to Girardi, after viewing the films, in his opinion the severity of plaintiff's spinal disease and the low prospect of improvement did not warrant the risks of surgery. Plaintiff undertook these programs through HJD's clinic, and was treated continuously until September of 2005. Sinai orthopedic surgeon observed that he did not "see a substantial neurologic improvement on [his] objective testing, but the patient does feel subjectively like he is improving.". Dr. Cross specializes in adult reconstructive surgery of the hip and knee, including primary and revision joint replacements. Dr. Michael Cross - Great Orthopedic Surgeons Here, at the time HSS submitted its untimely motion for summary judgment, the proceedings were already stayed by the concededly timely summary judgment motion brought by HJD. Dr. Ast is affiliated with Hospital For Special Surgery and Hospital for Special Surgery. A bitter divorce between a top New York City spine surgeon and his beauty-queen wife was quickly settled Monday after he filed court papers making tawdry accusations that she was moonlighting as. Mon 7:00 am - 6:00 pm. According to the affidavit, Murphy reviewed the medical records and opined that surgery for plaintiff was "indicated as early as June 2003 when the diagnosis of cervical spondylitic myelopathy was made," and from that time until December 2005 when surgery was performed, plaintiff's neurological condition deteriorated. Cross is a radiation oncologist. ford edge liftgate reset; 2007 dodge grand caravan rear shocks; gotham point lottery results; singer serger heavy duty manual; spectacle hut tampines mall However, the Court of Appeals intended no such exception, and to the extent this Court has created one, it did so, whether knowingly or unwittingly, by relying on precedents which predate Brill and which, if followed, will continue to perpetuate a culture of delay. McAloon & Friedman, New York (Gina Bernardi Di Folco of counsel), for respondent. New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J. The Mt. The motion court granted defendant HJD's motion for summary judgment and denied HSS's motion for the same relief. FEINMAN, J. Here, however, because HSS and HJD have different treatment histories with plaintiff, HJD's timely motion did not clearly put plaintiff on notice of the need to gather evidence in opposition to the arguments ultimately proffered by the HSS defendants. After residency, Dr. Cross completed a fellowship in Adult Reconstruction at Rush University Medical Center, where he won the Jorge O. Galante, MD Fellow Research Award. The dissent would seemingly limit the reach of Brill to those actions where a party files a motion for summary judgment long after the deadline for dispositive motions and the matter is on the trial calendar. 535 E 70th St . It was also Dr. Girardi's opinion that, given plaintiff's extensive spinal disease and the prospect of low improvement, the risk of surgery including quadriplegia or even death, was clearly not warranted. In short, the HSS "cross motion" was more than a late "me too" motion and should not have been considered on its merits. However, disregarding the untimeliness of HSS's motion, the court held that issues of fact precluded HSS from being granted summary judgment. Here, HJD's submission of its moving papers a mere three days before the final date set by the trial court contravenes the spirit of Brill by depriving HSS of an adequate opportunity to timely file its own application for similar relief because, at such point in time, HSS is presumed to have been devoting its resources to preparation for trial (Brill, 2 NY2d at 651). He underwent a course of steroid injections. The courts will no longer have to address the kinds of questions we address here. The notes also indicate that this doctor explained to plaintiff that the reason to do surgery would be to prevent worsening of his symptoms. Drugs & Supplements. Plaintiff opposed defendants' motions for summary judgment, although he did not address the claim of lack of informed consent. new york, ny zip 10021-099 phone: (212) 774-2114 fax: (646) 797-8298 The provider's authorized official is Michael B Cross . Plaintiff did not return to HSS for slightly over one year after this visit. Co-Chief of the Sports Medicine and Shoulder Service, and John Cavanaugh, PT, MEd, ATC, SCS, Clinical Supervisor, HSS Sports Rehabilitation and Performance Center, at the 2012 Summer Olympic. Plaintiff had "significant C-5 weakness of the right upper extremity." Rather, it will be for a trial court and a jury to hear plaintiff's case, and should plaintiff prevail, then, assuming a timely appeal is taken and perfected, and only then, will we have occasion to consider the merits of the claim against HSS. Co., 95 AD3d 568, 560 [1st Dept 2012] [court's clerical error, [*10]explained through an affidavit of the paralegal, provided good cause for granting the motion seeking renewal of the motion for summary judgment]). A late motion filing is properly entertained when it raises nearly identical issues to one timely made (see Lapin v Atlantic Realty Apts. Michael Cross is a provider established in Indianapolis, Indiana and his medical specialization is Orthopaedic Surgery with more than 17 years of experience. Hospital for Special Surgery/Cornell Medical Center Residency, Orthopaedic Surgery, 2007 - 2012. HSS Orthopedics in Stamford, CT | Stamford Health Education VANDERBILT UNIV SCH OF MED, Medical School 2006 But to reject the motion on that ground, under the facts herein, ignores the adverse consequences of imposing an overly restrictive rule, specifically, consequences that are especially adverse to the courts. Find Providers by Condition. Cross, MD. Location in NY, NJ, CT and Florida. He accepts multiple insurance plans, including Medicare. Top Hip Replacement and Knee Replacement Surgeons | HSS On April 11, 2003, an MRI revealed a narrowing of the spinal canal and the neural foramen with disc protrusions. dr michael cross leaving hss But most importantly, the dissent's approach is in derogation of CPLR 3212(a). Both seek dismissal of the complaint on the identical ground that it was not a departure from good and accepted medical practice to forego surgery in favor of a conservative treatment plan, i.e., based on the severity of plaintiff's existing spinal disease and the low prospect of improving his condition, the decision not to subject plaintiff to the risk of quadriplegia or death was a sound medical decision. Hospital For Special Surgery. Likewise, there is no indication that plaintiff was prepared to undergo the procedure prior to October 2004, when he first consulted with Dr. Freylinghuysen. ], 5 NY3d 514 [2005], citing Brill [dismissal after ongoing failure to comply with discovery orders]; Miceli v State Farm Mut. On the merits, discounting the supporting opinion of plaintiff's expert as conclusory, the majority finds that the evidence demonstrates that plaintiff suffered no injury as a result of HJD's February 2005 determination that surgical intervention was unwarranted. However, it is a well-established rule of statutory construction that a court should avoid any interpretation that leads to absurd and unintended consequences (see Matter of Friedman-Kien v City of New York, 92 AD2d 827, 828-829 [1983], affd 61 NY2d 923 [1984], citing Matter of Chatlos v McGoldrick, 302 NY 380, 387-388 [1951]; McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 1, Statutes, 92, 145, 147). The dissent's approach of judging a motion's merits without consideration of why it was untimely, can only lead to uncertainty and additional litigation as motions clearly barred by Brill become arguably permissible because one of the litigants perceives the motion to have merit and perceives no prejudice to the other side. As to the procedural issue raised, the majority has devised a solution to a problem recognized neither by the Legislature nor the Court of Appeals. The HSS "cross motion," which runs from page 842 to page 1002 of the record on appeal, is comprised of many items not contained in the HJD motion papers, not the least of which is additional medical records not submitted by HJD. It contends that in the interest of judicial economy we should not depart from "prior authority" that affords the court discretion to entertain a "marginally late filing" when there is merit to the application and no prejudice has been demonstrated, citing Burns v Gonzalez (307 AD2d 863 [1st Dept 2003]), and Garrison v City of New York (300 AD2d 14 [1st Dept 2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 510 [2003]). Corp., 91 NY2d 291, 296 [1998]; Bielat v Montrose, 272 AD2d 251, 251 [1st Dept 2000]). At a follow-up visit in June 2003, he was told that he might not fully recover his right arm motor loss; he was "somewhat disappointed" but acknowledged that his 1994 surgery had a similar result as to his left side. Dr. Cross completed his residency at HSS, where he was awarded the Russell Warren Basic Science Research Award and the Jean McDaniel Award, which is given to the Chief Resident who best demonstrates leadership, professionalism and ethics in the care of patients. As most recently articulated in Gibbs: Plaintiff underwent a two-stage cervical spine surgery in December 2005. If you need help finding an appropriate doctor who takes your insurance, contact our HSSConnect at 877.606.1555. The answer is yes. Cross, MD . The practice sought to be deterred in Brill is delay occasioned by the submission of a summary judgment motion on the eve of trial, thereby staying proceedings to the prejudice of litigants who have applied their resources in preparation for trial of the issues (Brill, 2 NY3d at 651). On March 24, 2016, Dr. Machler reported the results of a weeklong skin patch test, in which plaintiff was exposed to 121 allergens against the skin of his back. Physical therapy, pain management and treatment in HJD's neurology, hand and shoulder clinics were recommended. The court then went on to comment in dicta that if its merits were examined, summary dismissal should be denied as there are substantial questions of Under the circumstances presented by this matter, this view constitutes an unnecessarily rigid application of [*14]CPLR 3212(a), contravening the sound policy considerations underlying the decision and the intent expressed by the Legislature in amending the statute. Orthopaedic Research Society, Make an appointment with Peter commented in his entry: I had an amazing experience with Dr. Cross and his team at the Hospital for Special Surgery. Footnote 4: The dissent overlooks the very different lengths of treatment offered to plaintiff by HSS and HJD. His specialties include Orthopedic Surgeon. Oice of Alumni Afairs 535 East 70th Street, New York, NY 10021 212.606.1057 . The dissent expresses concern about an extra burden to the courts and litigants if we strictly enforce Brill "without taking into consideration the circumstances of the case." Kershaw v Hospital for Special Surgery :: 2013 :: New York Appellate There is nothing in the language of the statute to suggest this and it opens the door to abuse; once one movant has timely filed, any other party can argue that its motion, no matter when filed, should be addressed. Dr. Anthony Petrizzo of HJD examined plaintiff on February 11, 2005, finding severe upper extremity atrophy, with deltoid strength at 1/5, and 2/5 strength to the biceps. Dr. Michael P. Ast, MD is a health care provider primarily located in Paramus, NJ, with another office in New York, NY. Dr. Michael B. Cross's office location Michael B. Thereafter, the motion court issued an order which provided that "[t]he time for the various defendants to move for summary judgment is extended through November 14, 2011." This was supported by Dr. Hecht's finding that there was no substantial neurological improvement in plaintiff's condition after his surgery at Mt. Rather, we enforce the law as written by the legislature, and as explained in Brill. When deciding a motion for summary judgment, the court's function is issue finding rather than issue determination (see Sillman v Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 3 NY2d 395 [1957]). In that regard, the majority's disposition is antithetical, directing a party to try a case under circumstances to which Brill is inapposite because trial has been delayed not by an eleventh-hour summary judgment motion, but by one that is altogether timely. Sign up for our free summaries and get the latest delivered directly to you. Can't say enough about how friendly the staff was at this facility. He received his medical degree from Vanderbilt University School of Medicine and has been in practice between 11-20 years.. On November 11, 2011, HJD moved for summary judgment, making its motion returnable on December 14, 2011. However, the expert failed to support his assertion with an analysis of the multiple diagnostic tests and physical examinations conducted over the years. [FN3] Electronic tests revealed that plaintiff's cervical condition was significantly the same as in 2005 which supported Dr. Hecht's post surgical findings. Dr. Michael Allen Cross 5053 Wooster Rd Cincinnati, OH 45226. ), entered July 16, 2012, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted the summary judgment motion of defendants Hospital for Special Surgery, Peter Frelinghuysen, and Federico Pablo Girardi (collectively HSS) only to the extent of dismissing plaintiff's claim of lack of informed consent, and otherwise denied the motion, and from the judgment of the same court and Justice, entered August 20, 2012, dismissing the complaint as against defendant New York University Medical Center Hospital for Joint Diseases. Jorge O. Galante, MD Fellow Research Award Thus, his opinion is an ambiguous statement of causation, amounting to bare conjecture, which is insufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment (see Foster-Sturrup v Long, 95 AD3d 726, 728-729 [1st Dept 2012]; Callistro v Bebbington, 94 AD3d 408, 410-411 [1st Dept 2012], affd 20 NY3d 945 [2012]). Corp., 23 AD3d 202, 203 [1st Dept 2005]). I simply note that Brill is inapposite to the facts of this matter and that both the decision and the statute it construes apply only to a party whose motion has the effect of staying and delaying trial. Cross, MD. This surgeon was submitted to G.O.S. Once this burden is met, the burden shifts to the opposing party to submit proof in admissible form sufficient to create a question of fact requiring a trial (Kosson v Algaze, 84 NY2d 1019 [1995]). dr michael cross leaving hss Specialties. Plaintiff was referred for pain management and to HJD's neurology and hand clinics, with the notation that "no further surgery for the cervical spine [was] indicated.". Dr. Cross joined HSS as a clinician-scientist and currently has over 55 publications and has received numerous research awards at local, regional, and national levels, including the 2013 Frank Stinchfield Award from the Hip Society and the 2013 OREF/ORS Travel Award in Translational Research from the Orthopaedic Research Society. FIND A DOCTOR. Dr. Michael Cross' Practice at the HSS Pavilion in New York, NY In addition, he was voted by the faculty as the Distinguished Housestaff Award winner at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center. Diseases & Conditions Procedures & Tests Symptoms & Signs. In support of its motion, HSS even relies on the same affidavit by Dr. Olsewski submitted in support of HJD's motion. In 1994, when plaintiff was 53 years old, he underwent spinal surgery at defendant Hospital for Special Surgery, to address multilevel cervical stenosis with myelopathy and radiculopathy, which, over the course of five years, had led to progressive weakness in his left shoulder and upper extremities. Plaintiff commenced his lawsuit in May 2007, claiming medical malpractice and failure to secure informed consent. All rights reserved. Cross appeals from the order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J. As to HJD, the court found that, "without any doubt, [its] moving papers, primarily through the thorough opinions expressed by [its expert], [made] out a prima facie case for the relief sought." at 236, citing Andrea, Miceli, Brill, and Kihl). Sinai Hospital in December 2005, with no objective sign of improvement in physical function after over 10 months, according to his surgeon's report and tests taken at HJD's neurology clinic in October, 2006. An overly expansive application of Brill invites unintended consequences following from the Legislature's 1996 amendment of CPLR 3212(a). "Before this matter may proceed to trial, it will be necessary to decide, as a matter of law, whether a doctor has a duty to perform a surgical procedure requested by a patient despite, in the professional opinion of the doctor, the high risk and absence of benefit that such surgery entails. Co., 3 NY3d 725 [2004], citing Brill [denying untimely filed summary judgment motion because although the plaintiff argued she had meritorious case, no reasonable excuse was provided as to the motion's late filing]; see also Casas v Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc., 105 AD3d 471 [1st Dept 2013] [upholding order striking answer where the defendant offered no reasonable excuse for its failure to comply with discovery order and provide a meritorious defense]). He met with another HSS doctor on October 22, 2004, who wrote that the plan was to have plaintiff return in November to see Frelinghuysen "for booking of his anterior disc fusion surgery." Bonanno v. Mayman, 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 33343 | Casetext Search + Citator Michael B Cross Mid-flexion instability (MFI) in total knee arthroplasty refers to a distinct clinical entity where the knee is stable at full extension and 90 of flexion, but unstable. Plaintiff filed his note of issue on August 24, 2011. Tom, J.P., Acosta, Saxe, Freedman, Feinman, JJ. Of these, only molybdenum is a metal. Thus, there were issues of fact raised "as to the advisability of surgery sufficient to defeat the motion for summary judgment on the merits.". By making a cross motion, the party saves an extra day in court, and quite possibly the time and trouble of amassing fresh proof, if it happens that all or part of the evidentiary foundation on which the cross motion is based has already been produced for consideration (Patrick M. Connors, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C2215:1, 2215:2). I am returning on Oct 9, 2020, for my left knee and am actually looking forward to it. Visit Website. On October 1, 2004, plaintiff first met with defendants Peter Frelinghuysen, M.D. Moreover, while there is mention of a surgical option in the 2004 hospital records, the evidence does not show that evaluation of the attendant risks and benefits was undertaken until October 2004, culminating in the December 2004 decision that the associated risk was too great.
William Johnston Burr,
Bobby Marx Son Of Barbara Sinatra,
Mayonnaise Colored Benz I Push Miracle Whips Etsy,
Apple Cider Vinegar Ringworm Overnight,
Articles D