Mykel Lavar Moody et al., Appellants, v Talat Hmoud et al., Respondents, et al., Defendants. (Index No. 7226/13), 192 A.D.3d 1007

Summary

HOLDINGS: [1]-In a medical malpractice action, a trial court properly determined that certain defendants established a prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the amended complaint insofar as asserted against each of them by submitting expert affidavits that concluded that defendants did not deviate from the applicable standards of care in their treatment of decedent, and their treatment did not proximately cause her subsequent complications or death; [2]-Affidavit of plaintiffs' expert submitted in opposition was speculative, conclusory, and insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact; [3]-Other defendants established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the statute of limitations in CPLR 214-a and EPTL 5-4.1 had expired prior to plaintiffs filing the amended summons and complaint adding them as defendants.