(Download) "Grace M. Henegar Et Al. v. A. Z. Freudenheim Et Al." by Supreme Court of New York " eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Grace M. Henegar Et Al. v. A. Z. Freudenheim Et Al.
- Author : Supreme Court of New York
- Release Date : January 06, 1972
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 66 KB
Description
The complaint was served in February, 1965, four months prior to the decision of this court in Di Rosse v. Wein (24 A.D.2d 510), which, for the first time in this State, recognized that malpractice could include a failure to make reasonable disclosure to the patient of the known dangers incident to or possible in a proposed course of treatment. In February, 1971 plaintiffs were granted leave to amend their bill of particulars so as to allege a lack of informed consent to vaginal radiation treatments which had been administered. Leave thus to amend the bill was granted on condition that plaintiffs submit to further discovery proceedings. In September, 1971, the individual defendants, having taken advantage of those discovery proceedings, moved for reargument of the motion to amend the bill. The reargument motion was heard by Mr. Justice Grady, Mr. Justice Galloway, who had granted the original motion, having died in the interim. Although CPLR 2221, which controls motions for reargument, contains no time limit, such motions should be made prior to the expiration of the time within which an appeal from the original order may be taken (Matter of Huie [ Furman ], 20 N.Y.2d 568). Defendants may not take advantage of the order and, after receiving its benefits, move for reargument long after the time limited for the taking of an appeal had passed. The assertion of the new theory of lack of informed consent is not barred by the Statute of Limitations (CPLR 203, subd. [e]; see, also, Tobias v. Kesseler, 18 A.D.2d 1094).