NY appeals court reverses decision in hospital negligence case

Listen to this article

A state appeals court has reversed a lower court ruling and ordered a hospital to provide medical records to a couple suing the hospital for negligence.

Plaintiffs Leon Martin III and his wife, Jean Liu Martin, filed the lawsuit against Buffalo General Medical Center in state Supreme Court in Erie County in March 2022.

The Martins are represented by attorney Brian P. Fitzgerald.

Mr. Martin was admitted to the hospital on Sept. 24, 2020, with an infection in his lower leg, according to the complaint.

Five days later, another patient was placed in the same room as Martin, according to the complaint.

On Oct. 3, 2020, a nurse told Martin “an accident had occurred” and he had been exposed to COVID-19. The next day, Martin tested positive for COVID-19.

Martin’s exposure to, and contraction of COVID -19 “came about as a result of the negligence, gross negligence and deviations from accepted standards of care by the defendant Buffalo General, its agents, servants and employees,” the suit claims.

Because of the hospital’s alleged negligence, Mrs. Martin “was also potentially exposed to contracting the COVID-19 virus and suffered emotional distress as a result,” the suit claims.

During discovery, the Martins sought the complete hospital record for the patient who was put in Martin’s room, with the patient’s name redacted.

The hospital refused to provide those records, and the plaintiffs filed a motion to compel production of the records with the name and other patient-identifying information redacted.

The defense cross-moved for a protective order for the records.

State Supreme Court Justice Emilio Colaiacovo, in September 2023, denied the plaintiffs’ motion to compel and granted the defense motion seeking a protective order.

In a recent decision, the Appellate Division of state Supreme Court, Fourth Department, reversed Colaiacovo’s ruling.

The plaintiffs established that the hospital records would show when the hospital became aware that the other patient had tested positive for COVID-19 “and that such information is material and necessary to establish whether defendant had notice that it was placing plaintiff in the same room as a person who had COVID-19,” the Fourth Department wrote.

“We therefore conclude that Supreme Court erred in granting that part of defendant’s cross-motion seeking a protective order and in denying plaintiffs’ motion to compel production of the nonparty patient’s hospital records with patient name and other patient identifying information redacted,” the court wrote.

[email protected] / (585) 232-2035