Dr. Michael B. Cross's office location Michael B. 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. Specialties: We provide physical, occupational, and speech therapy primarily in an in-home setting for the older adult community, and with recent addition of services at our skilled nursing facilities, outpatient and pediatric settings. Plaintiff had "significant C-5 weakness of the right upper extremity." Ctr., 123 AD2d 843 [2d Dept 1986]). . Feinman, J. . 2013 NY Slip Op 08548
We are concerned that the respect for court orders and statutory mandates and the authoritative voice of the Court of Appeals are undermined each time an untimely motion is considered simply by labeling it a "cross motion" notwithstanding the absence of a reasonable explanation for its untimeliness. In addition, he was voted by the faculty as the Distinguished Housestaff Award winner at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center. Oice of Alumni Afairs 535 East 70th Street, New York, NY 10021 212.606.1057 . Plaintiff cites no precedent for imposing liability under these circumstances, and no comparable New York case has been located. Lapin is one in a line of cases holding that an untimely cross motion may be considered on its merits when it and the timely motion address essentially the same issues. While courts have deemed this mislabeling a "technical" defect which will be disregarded, particularly where the nonmovant does not object and it results in no prejudice to the nonmoving party (see Sheehan v Marshall, 9 AD3d 403, 404 [2d Dept 2004]), in this case the nature of nonmovant plaintiff's opposition is that there was prejudice because to the extent the court deems HSS's motion a cross motion, the Brill rule is ignored. RX Drugs & Medications Vitamins & Supplements. Dr. Cross specializes in adult reconstructive surgery of the hip and knee, including primary and revision joint replacements. Brill holds that to rein in these late motions, brought as late as shortly before trial, CPLR 3212(a) requires that motions for summary judgment must be brought within 120 days of the filing of the note of issue or the time established by the court; where a motion is untimely, the movant must show good cause for the delay, otherwise the late motion will not be addressed (see Isolabella v Sapir, 96 AD3d 427, 427 [1st Dept 2012]). 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). After residency, Dr. Cross completed his fellowship in Adult Reconstruction at Rush University Medical Center in 2013where he won the Jorge O. Galante, MD Fellow Research Award. Overall rating 4.92 Wait time 3.69 Bedside manner 4.85 Your trust is our top concern, so providers can't pay to alter or remove reviews. Jewish-Hillside Med. Health insurers that provide access to Hospital for Special Surgery (click the insurance company name for more details) Aetna Affinity by Molina Healthcare Blue Cross Blue Shield - Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield - Horizon Dr. Machler reported that plaintiff had mildly positive reactions to molybdenum, tobramycin, benzoic acid, and formaldehyde. Unlike Brill, the circumstances presented by the instant matter do not furnish a compelling reason to depart from prior authority affording a court discretion to entertain a marginally late filing where the party's application has merit and no prejudice has been demonstrated by an adversary (see e.g. Co., LLC, 48 AD3d 337, 337 [1st Dept 2008]; Alexander v Gordon, 95 AD3d 1245, 1246-1247 [2d Dept 2012]; Grande v Peteroy, 39 AD3d 590, 591-592 [2d Dept 2007]). Footnote 3: In Cadichon v Facelle (18 NY3d 230 [2011]), the Court reversed a "ministerial" dismissal based on the failure to timely file the note of issue because the trial court did not provide notice to the parties or issue a formal order; the decision notes that the record showed that neither set of parties acted "with expediency in moving the case forward," and that deadlines must not be disregarded (id. 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. All concur except Tom, J.P. and Freedman, J. who dissent in part in an Opinion by Tom, J.P.
The evidence will be construed in the light most favorable to the one moved against (see Young v New York City Health & Hosps. 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. 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]). Ten months after the surgery at Mt. Mon 7:00 am - 6:00 pm. [*2]Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, New York (Brian J. Isaac of counsel), and Shoshana T. Bookson, New York, for respondent-appellant. Dr. Michael Cross, MD works in New York, NY as an Orthopedic Surgery Specialist and has 16 years experience. Although the system mainly runs in the . Orthopaedic Research Society, Make an appointment with He underwent a course of steroid injections. "[FN4] There are sufficient discrepancies in the record and in the experts' opinions that raise questions of fact regarding HSS's course of treatment beginning in 2004, if not earlier. "Thus, the rationale for the court's denial was articulated as being that the "cross motion" was untimely. Dr. Michael B. However, the City gave no explanation for why its motion was made close to a year after the trial calendar papers were filed. 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. Dr. Cross is board-certified with several association memberships, including the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, the New York State Society of Orthopaedic Surgeons, the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons, the Orthopaedic Research Society, and the Musculoskeletal Infection Society. Since surgery carried serious risks and would likely not benefit the patient, conservative management with physical therapy and pain management would be more appropriate. Cross specializes in adult reconstructive surgery of the hip and knee, including primary and revision joint replacements. Here, the modestly late motion submitted by HSS sought relief on the same issues raised in HJD's timely motion. The authorized official title is Physician and has the following contact phone number (212) 774-2114. At his next visit on November 12, 2004, a different doctor indicated in the clinic notes that Frelinghuysen and Girardi had recommended "what sounds like a two-level anterior cervical decompression and fusion," and that plaintiff would follow up in one week "to discuss surgery" [*3]with Frelinghuysen [FN1]. ", As to the delay causing any injury, the doctor stated that there was no identifiable injury caused by any alleged delay during the four month period between when plaintiff was first seen at HJD and when he first went to Mt. On November 11, 2011, HJD moved for summary judgment, making its motion returnable on December 14, 2011. Find Providers by Condition. 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. Olsewski opined that based upon plaintiff's medical, diagnostic and surgical history, further cervical surgery would have been an "unjustifiable and extraordinarily risky and aggressive treatment option." In opposition, Murphy's opinions were "somewhat conclusory." Dr. Cross is one of the most pleasant medical providers that I have ever come in contact with. Dr. Michael Brian Cross, MD Orthopedic Surgery Leave a review Orthoindy Northwest 8450 Northwest Blvd, Indianapolis, IN, 46278 12 other locations (317) 802-2000 Overview Locations OVERVIEW. I even liked the food I compared it to high-end diner fare). dr michael cross leaving hss. Granted, the HSS motion is not a cross motion, as denominated, and as such it is untimely (CPLR 2215). Find doctor Michael Brian Cross Orthopedic Surgeon physician in White Plains, NY. Health & Living. Plaintiff did not return to HSS for slightly over one year after this visit. Michael B. 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. You can explore additional available newsletters here. Ins. New York, NY, 10021. Were the motions properly labeled they would not be judicially considered without an explanation for the delay. I obviously highly recommend Dr. Cross and his team. Cross is a radiation oncologist. He attended Washington University in St. Louis for his undergraduate education, where he double majored in chemistry and mathematics/statistics and played varsity football. at 653). 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. Sinai, where he was first seen in the orthopedic clinic on April 21, 2005. 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." Plaintiff commenced this action against HSS and HJD claiming, in essence, that defendant hospitals were negligent in declining to timely perform the surgery he sought, particularly, that their delay caused him to sustain injury that otherwise might have been avoided. Footnotes
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. On April 11, 2003, an MRI revealed a narrowing of the spinal canal and the neural foramen with disc protrusions. See times, locations, directions & contact information for Dr. Michael Cross in Indianapolis, IN. Thus, Brill cannot be said to reflect an intent to abandon the conspicuous advantages of summary judgment for the sake of procedural formalism. Quite likely, the City's legal argument would have been dispositive. Menu. In March of 2002, plaintiff returned to HSS with complaints of pain in his lower back and left leg. Musculoskeletal Infection Society According to plaintiff, he understood that surgery would be performed in late December, and he began obtaining the necessary medical clearances. In sum, an outdated, pre-Brill interpretation of the amended CPLR 3212(a) continued to hold sway in Lapin. To the extent HSS's motion was directed at the complaint, as opposed to any cross claims by HJD, and was not made returnable the same day as the original motion, it was not a cross motion as defined in CPLR 2215. Hospital For Special Surgery. Given the budgetary constraints presently confronted by the court system, this is hardly a fitting time to require trial of a matter devoid of apparent merit and otherwise amenable to disposition on motion, and the "genuine need" to be accommodated is that of the court to proceed expeditiously (id.). Type a specific doctor's name, body part, procedure or condition, then choose from the options. Sinai where plaintiff later underwent a two stage revision cervical laminectomy with fusion. Health A-Z. 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. I am returning on Oct 9, 2020, for my left knee and am actually looking forward to it. Rote application of the summary judgment provision, which permits the court to "set a date after which no such motion may be made," leads to the result advocated by the majority strict rejection of the motion as untimely without taking into consideration the circumstances of the case, relegating the moving party to litigating its position at trial. 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
The cross movant may rely on the papers submitted with the main motion to support the relief sought. Everyone was professional. Dr. Petrizzo testified that the overwhelming majority of patients with cervical myelopathy do not regain function after decompression surgery. Brill reiterates Kihl's statement that, " [i]f the credibility of court orders and the integrity of our judicial system are to be maintained, a litigant cannot ignore court orders with impunity'" (2 NY3d at 652-653, quoting Kihl at 123). Differences necessarily exist because [plaintiff] was a patient at HSS for an extended time before he came to [HJD]. . The problem in the case at bar is that HSS's motion, in addition to being untimely, is not a true cross motion. HSS Florida is a joint venture with Tenet Healthcare. The motion court properly dismissed the case as against HJD. Sinai, and the only change in his condition was numbness in his right arm and hand, likely due to the development of carpal tunnel syndrome. It is up to the litigant to show the court why the rule should be flexible in the particular circumstances, or, in the words of the statute, that there is "good cause shown" for the delay. The best working with the best. for cervical spine cases. [FN3]
hurley joggers womens; sink clips not long enough; viewsonic vx3276 mhd reset; usaa dental insurance number; dr michael cross leaving hss. Jean McDaniel Award, American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons In June 2004, plaintiff returned to HSS with continuing complaints of progressive right shoulder weakness, increased neck pain and decreased balance. New York State Society of Orthopaedic Surgeons HJD timely moved for summary judgment on November 11, 2011. ), 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, should be affirmed, without costs; 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, should be affirmed, without costs. Mobile Navigation Menu. ), 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 Dr. Michael Cross, MD is a board certified orthopedic surgeon in Lafayette, Indiana. Drugs & Supplements. The value of enforcing the terms of the statute as written is that attorneys will make sure their motions are timely filed or that there is a good reason for the lateness. In Brill the Court of Appeals indicated that late-filed summary judgment motions are "another example of sloppy practice threatening our judicial system" (2 NY3d at 652, emphasis added), and pointed to its earlier decision, Kihl v Pfeffer (94 NY2d 118 [1999]), which affirmed dismissal of the complaint because the plaintiff failed to respond to a court order within the court-ordered time frame. The Hospital for Special Surgery a pre-eminent facility for musculoskeletal health and orthopedics and a New . The undesirable practice sought to be prevented by revision of CPLR 3212(a) is the waste of resources expended in preparation for trial as the result of a belated summary judgment motion staying the proceedings. Logically, if plaintiff did not sustain injury as a result of HJD's February 2005 decision, it follows that he did not sustain injury as a result of the similar December 2004 determination, approximately 2 months earlier, by HSS physicians to forego surgery, especially in light of plaintiff's long history of [*13]cervical disc disease. Dr. Michael P. Ast, MD is a health care provider primarily located in Paramus, NJ, with another office in New York, NY. Significantly, Brill deals with the straightforward situation in which an initial summary judgment motion is filed well after a matter has been certified as ready for trial "in violation of legislative mandate" (id. The Best of the Best in Orthopedic Surgery. Palomo v 175th St. Realty Corp., 101 AD3d 579 [1st Dept 2012]; Conklin v Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Auth., 49 AD3d 320 [1st Dept 2008]; Filannino v Triborough Bridge & Tunnnel Auth., 34 AD3d 280, 281-282 [1st Dept 2006], appeal dismissed 9 NY3d 862 [2007]; Osario v BRF Constr. 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. 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. He has 16 years of experience. Find All Providers . Thus, there were issues of fact raised "as to the advisability of surgery sufficient to defeat the motion for summary judgment on the merits.". The Mt. As to HSS, the court clearly held that because the cross motion was filed impermissibly [*5]late with no reason offered for the lateness, it should be denied. Contact; Help; Partners; Blog; Press; Product; . 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. I respectfully disagree with the majority's holding and would dismiss plaintiff's claim of medical malpractice against defendants Hospital for Special Surgery and its physicians (collectively, HSS). However, bending the rule results in the practical elimination of the "good cause shown" aspect of CPLR 3212(a), and the clear intent of Brill. He received his medical degree from University of Cincinnati College of Medicine and has been in practice for more than 20 years. In Frelinghuysen's words, he and Girardi decided that surgery "would not help." OrthoIndy Hospital is physician-owned and operated. Strict and rigid application of Brill is even less understandable given the similarity of the grounds advanced by the respective hospitals in support of their summary judgment motions and the ground upon which disposition rests. Sinai, in October 2006, plaintiff returned to HJD's neurology clinic, reporting a lack of improvement in upper extremity strength, and some pain and numbness on the right arm and hand. Finally, the majority adopts the trial court's conclusion that the expert's opinion is imprecise with respect to the nature of the alleged deterioration in plaintiff's condition and the extent to which each hospital bears responsibility. 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. A cross motion offers several advantages to the movant. Cross M.D - Orthopaedic Surgeon - Home | Facebook The clinic notes also indicate that plaintiff told the examining physician that he had recently secured a job and was not interested "whatsoever" in immediate surgery; plaintiff disputes this and says he was not working at that time. DOWNLOADABLE RESOURCE: THE ULTIMATE GUIDE TO TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT, DOWNLOADABLE RESOURCE: THE ULTIMATE GUIDE TO TOTAL HIP REPLACEMENT, Russell Warren Basic Science Research Award . New York Presbyterian Hospital Internship, Preliminary Year, 2006 . On October 1, 2004, plaintiff first met with defendants Peter Frelinghuysen, M.D. Find Providers by Specialty Find Providers by Procedure. This surgeon was submitted to G.O.S. Dr. Michael B. Allowing movants to file untimely, mislabeled "cross motions" without good cause shown for the delay, affords them an unfair and improper advantage. Judgment, same court and Justice, entered August 20, 2012, affirmed, without costs. Accordingly, the order should be modified to the extent of granting defendant HSS's motion for summary judgment. Saint Elizabeth Edgewood Hospital 1 Medical Village Dr Edgewood, KY 41017. 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." Location in NY, NJ, CT and Florida. Unfairness to one party is not remedied by applying the statute to the detriment of another.[FN1]. HSS admitted that its motion seeking summary judgment and dismissal of the complaint as against it was filed nearly two months after the court-imposed deadline for making dispositive motions,[FN2] but argued that it should be considered because it sought relief on the same issues raised in codefendant HJD's timely motion.
Does Cosequin Make Dogs Pee More,
How To Cleanse Blue Lace Agate,
Todd Rice Strength Coach,
Senegence Inactive Distributor,
Articles D