61 New York opinions name it 13 courts 1933–2026 23 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Wild v. Catholic Health Systemgreen2 sentences2016In order to establish proximate causation, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant’s deviation from the standard of care “was a substantial factor in bringing about the injury” (PJI 2:70; see Wild v Catholic Health Sys., 21 NY3d 951, 954-955 [2013]; see also Mazella, 27 NY3d at 706 ). 2016In order to establish proximate causation, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant’s deviation from the standard of care “was a substantial factor in bringing about the injury” (PJI 2:70; see Wild v Catholic Health Sys., 21 NY3d 951, 954-955 [2013]; see also Mazella, 27 NY3d at 706 ). | 4 | 4 |
Janice Mazella v. William Beals, M.D.green2 sentences2016In order to establish proximate causation, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant’s deviation from the standard of care “was a substantial factor in bringing about the injury” (PJI 2:70; see Wild v Catholic Health Sys., 21 NY3d 951, 954-955 [2013]; see also Mazella, 27 NY3d at 706 ). 2016In order to establish proximate causation, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant’s deviation from the standard of care “was a substantial factor in bringing about the injury” (PJI 2:70; see Wild v Catholic Health Sys., 21 NY3d 951, 954-955 [2013]; see also Mazella, 27 NY3d at 706 ). | 4 | 4 |
Stebick v. McGeegreen2 sentences2025Although the Pattern Jury Instructions did not include a loss of chance pattern charge until 2023, i.e., after the second trial in this matter took place in December 2022, this Court had already issued numerous decisions prior to December 2022 indicating that "the loss of chance theory of causation . . . requires only that a plaintiff 'present evidence from which a rational jury could infer that there was a "substantial possibility " that the patient was denied a chance of the better outcome as a result of the defendant's deviation from the standard of care' " ( Leberman v Glick , 207 AD3d 120 2022The loss of chance theory of causation applicable to the facts of this case requires only that a plaintiff "present evidence from which a rational jury could infer that there was a 'substantial possibility' that the patient was denied a chance of the better outcome as a result of the defendant's deviation from the standard of care" ( Clune v Moore , 142 AD3d 1330, 1331-1332 [4th Dept 2016]; see Wolf v Persaud , 130 AD3d 1523, 1525 [4th Dept 2015]). | 3 | 4 |
Goldberg v. Horowitzgreen2 sentences2016Where, as here, the plaintiff alleges that the defendant negligently failed or delayed in diagnosing and treating a condition, a finding that the negligence was a proximate cause of an injury to the patient may be predicated on the theory that the defendant thereby “diminished [the patient’s] chance of a better outcome,” in this case, survival (Wolf, 130 AD3d at 1525 ; see Goldberg v Horowitz, 73 AD3d 691, 694 [2010]). 2016Where, as here, the plaintiff alleges that the defendant negligently failed or delayed in diagnosing and treating a condition, a finding that the negligence was a proximate cause of an injury to the patient may be predicated on the theory that the defendant thereby “diminished [the patient’s] chance of a better outcome,” in this case, survival (Wolf, 130 AD3d at 1525 ; see Goldberg v Horowitz, 73 AD3d 691, 694 [2010]). | 3 | 3 |
Candia v. Estepangreen2 sentences2016Hosp., 21 AD3d 1305, 1306 [2005]; see Candía v Estepan, 289 AD2d 38, 39-40 [2001]; Stewart v New York City Health & Hosps. 2016Hosp., 21 AD3d 1305, 1306 [2005]; see Candía v Estepan, 289 AD2d 38, 39-40 [2001]; Stewart v New York City Health & Hosps. | 3 | 3 |
WOLF, SARAH E. v. PERSAUD, M.D., ANDRE A.green2 sentences2025Although the Pattern Jury Instructions did not include a loss of chance pattern charge until 2023, i.e., after the second trial in this matter took place in December 2022, this Court had already issued numerous decisions prior to December 2022 indicating that "the loss of chance theory of causation . . . requires only that a plaintiff 'present evidence from which a rational jury could infer that there was a "substantial possibility " that the patient was denied a chance of the better outcome as a result of the defendant's deviation from the standard of care' " ( Leberman v Glick , 207 AD3d 120 2022The loss of chance theory of causation applicable to the facts of this case requires only that a plaintiff "present evidence from which a rational jury could infer that there was a 'substantial possibility' that the patient was denied a chance of the better outcome as a result of the defendant's deviation from the standard of care" ( Clune v Moore , 142 AD3d 1330, 1331-1332 [4th Dept 2016]; see Wolf v Persaud , 130 AD3d 1523, 1525 [4th Dept 2015]). | 2 | 5 |
Leberman v. Glickgreen2 sentences2025Although the Pattern Jury Instructions did not include a loss of chance pattern charge until 2023, i.e., after the second trial in this matter took place in December 2022, this Court had already issued numerous decisions prior to December 2022 indicating that "the loss of chance theory of causation . . . requires only that a plaintiff 'present evidence from which a rational jury could infer that there was a "substantial possibility " that the patient was denied a chance of the better outcome as a result of the defendant's deviation from the standard of care' " ( Leberman v Glick , 207 AD3d 120 2023Rather, it requires only that a plaintiff "present evidence from which a rational jury could infer that there was a substantial possibility that the patient was denied a chance of the better outcome as a result of the defendant's deviation from the standard of care" ( Leberman v Glick , 207 AD3d at 1206 [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see Lopes v Lenox Hill Hosp. , 172 AD3d 699 , 702 [2d Dept 2019]; D.Y. v Catskill Regional Med. | 2 | 3 |
Gregory v. Cortland Memorial Hospitalgreen2 sentences2016Hosp., 21 AD3d 1305, 1306 [2005]; see Candía v Estepan, 289 AD2d 38, 39-40 [2001]; Stewart v New York City Health & Hosps. 2016Hosp., 21 AD3d 1305, 1306 [2005]; see Candía v Estepan, 289 AD2d 38, 39-40 [2001]; Stewart v New York City Health & Hosps. | 2 | 3 |
Parker v. Stategreen2 sentences2013The court therefore properly dismissed the claim to that extent as well (see Parker v State of New York, 242 AD2d 785, 786 [1997]). 2013The court therefore properly dismissed the claim to that extent as well (see Parker v State of New York, 242 AD2d 785, 786 [1997]). | 2 | 3 |
Diaz v. New York Downtown Hospitalgreen2 sentences2024Thus, Luciani's opinion in this respect is unsupported by the record and therefore insufficient to raise an issue of fact to defeat the CCP defendants' motion for summary judgment on this alleged deviation from the standard of care ( see Diaz v New York Downtown Hosp. , 99 NY2d 542, 544 [2002]; Fiszer v Gliwa , 223 AD3d 881 , 882 [2d Dept 2024]). 2024Thus, Luciani's opinion in this respect is unsupported by the record and therefore insufficient to raise an issue of fact to defeat the CCP defendants' motion for summary judgment on this alleged deviation from the standard of care ( see Diaz v New York Downtown Hosp. , 99 NY2d 542, 544 [2002]; Fiszer v Gliwa , 223 AD3d 881 , 882 [2d Dept 2024]). | 2 | 2 |
Neyman v. Doshi Diagnostic Imaging Services, P.C.green2 sentences2023Ctr. , 156 AD3d 1003, 1005 [3d Dept 2017]; Neyman v Doshi Diagnostic Imaging Services, P.C. , 153 AD3d 538, 545 [2d Dept 2017]). 2023Ctr. , 156 AD3d 1003, 1005 [3d Dept 2017]; Neyman v Doshi Diagnostic Imaging Services, P.C. , 153 AD3d 538, 545 [2d Dept 2017]). | 2 | 2 |
Malone v. Kimgreen2 sentences2023Corp ., 148 AD3d 434 [1st Dept 2017]; Malone v Kim , 96 AD3d 477, 477 [1st Dept 2012]). 2023Corp ., 148 AD3d 434 [1st Dept 2017]; Malone v Kim , 96 AD3d 477, 477 [1st Dept 2012]). | 2 | 2 |
D.Y. Ex Rel. DeShawn Y. v. Catskill Regional Medical Centergreen2 sentences2023Ctr. , 156 AD3d 1003, 1005 [3d Dept 2017]; Neyman v Doshi Diagnostic Imaging Services, P.C. , 153 AD3d 538, 545 [2d Dept 2017]). 2023Ctr. , 156 AD3d 1003, 1005 [3d Dept 2017]; Neyman v Doshi Diagnostic Imaging Services, P.C. , 153 AD3d 538, 545 [2d Dept 2017]). | 2 | 2 |
Deutsch v. Chaglassiangreen2 sentences2013These adequately detailed assertions were sufficient to defeat summary judgment, since they were predicated on specific factual evidence, and were not merely speculation (see Deutsch v Chaglassian, 71 AD3d 718, 719 [2d Dept 2010]). 2013These adequately detailed assertions were sufficient to defeat summary judgment, since they were predicated on specific factual evidence, and were not merely speculation (see Deutsch v Chaglassian, 71 AD3d 718, 719 [2d Dept 2010]). | 2 | 2 |
Alvarez v. Prospect Hospitalgreen2 sentences2017In opposition to the defendant’s prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). 1991Contrary to defendant’s assertion, Schein’s affidavit was adequate to demonstrate the meritorious nature of plaintiffs’ claim (see, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 326-327 ; Winegrad v New York Univ. | 1 | 2 |
Buchheim v. Sanghavigreen2 sentences2026In any event, the procedure was never performed, and thus any claim arising from a claimed lack of informed consent necessarily fails ( see Public Health Law § 2805-d[1], [3]; Schkolnik v Hospital for Joint Diseases Orthopaedic Institute , 211 AD2d 347 [1st Dept 1995], lv denied 87 NY2d 895 [1995]; see also Buchheim v Sanghavi , 299 AD2d 229 [1st Dept 2002], lv denied 100 NY2d 506 [2003]). 2026In any event, the procedure was never performed, and thus any claim arising from a claimed lack of informed consent necessarily fails (<i>see</i> Public Health Law § 2805-d[1], [3]; <i>Schkolnik v Hospital for Joint Diseases Orthopaedic Institute</i>, 211 AD2d 347 [1st Dept 1995], <i>lv denied</i> 87 NY2d 895 [1995]; <i>see also Buchheim v Sanghavi</i>, 299 AD2d 229 [1st Dept 2002], <i>lv denied</i> 100 NY2d 506 [2003]).</p> <p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.</p> <p>ENTERED: April 16, 2026</p> </div> <div> <footer> <div> <p>Co | 1 | 1 |
Lopez v. City of New Yorkgreen1 sentence2025Lopez v City of New York , 80 AD3d 432, 433 [1st Dept 2011]; see generally Garcia v New York-Presbyt. | 1 | 1 |
Restrepo v. Stategreen2 sentences2025Klinger, D.V.M., P.C. , 179 Misc 2d 609 [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 1998]; see also Matter of Restrepo v State of New York , 146 Misc 2d 349 [Ct Cl 1989], affd 179 AD2d 804 [1992]). 2025Klinger, D.V.M., P.C. , 179 Misc 2d 609 [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 1998]; see also Matter of Restrepo v State of New York , 146 Misc 2d 349 [Ct Cl 1989], affd 179 AD2d 804 [1992]). | 1 | 1 |
Cerrone v. North Shore-Long Is. Jewish Health Sys., Inc.green1 sentence2025Jewish Health Sys., Inc .. 197 AD3d 449, 450-451 [2d Dept 202 l ]: Kenan,. | 1 | 1 |
| Restrepo v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
Andre v. Mecta Corp.green1 sentence2025In addition, given Dr. Brauer's awareness of the risk, his status as a "responsible intermediary" breaks the chain of proximate cause between any failure to warn by Zeltiq and the harm to Silverstein ( see id. at 722 , citing Andre v Mecta Corp. , 186 AD2d 1, 2 [1st Dept 1992], lv denied 85 NY2d 801 [1995]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Scottgreen1 sentence2025Whether there was a deviation from the standard of due care is a matter which can be determined by the jurors, as laymen, who would apply their own common knowledge and everyday experience to the legal principles applicable to this case (see Reardon, 292 AD2d at 237). | 1 | 1 |
| Alvarado v. Milesgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Christine S. v. Community Hospitalgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Indig v. Finkelsteingreen | 1 | 1 |
| Peluso v. C.R. Bard, Inc.green | 1 | 1 |
| James v. Wormuthgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Romano v. Stanleygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Joswick v. Lenox Hill Hospitalgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Hoagland v. Kampgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Grzelecki v. Sipperlygreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Williamsgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Petrillo v. Leathergreen | 1 | 1 |
| People v. Feldmangreen | 1 | 1 |
| Labate v. Plotkingreen | 1 | 1 |
| Kelly v. St. Luke's Hospital of Kansas Citygreen | 1 | 1 |
| South Slope Holding Corp. v. Board of Assessment Reviewgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Colon v. City of New Yorkgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Leahy v. Allengreen | 1 | 1 |
| Campagnola v. Mulhollandgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Formato v. Formato
green
2 sentences2024(See Formato v. Formato, 173 AD2d 274 [1st Dept. 1991]). 2024(See Formato v. Formato, 173 AD2d 274 [1st Dept. 1991]). | 2 | 2024–2024 |
Ducasse v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.
green
2 sentences2023Corp ., 148 AD3d 434 [1st Dept 2017]; Malone v Kim , 96 AD3d 477, 477 [1st Dept 2012]). 2023Corp ., 148 AD3d 434 [1st Dept 2017]; Malone v Kim , 96 AD3d 477, 477 [1st Dept 2012]). | 2 | 2023–2023 |
Stukas v. Streiter
green
2 sentences2013Therefore, the burden shifted to the plaintiff to raise a triable issue of fact only as to whether there was a deviation from the standard of care (see Stukas v Streiter, 83 AD3d at 30 ). 2013Therefore, the burden shifted to the plaintiff to raise a triable issue of fact only as to whether there was a deviation from the standard of care (see Stukas v Streiter, 83 AD3d at 30 ). | 2 | 2013–2013 |
Zaremba v. Zaremba
green
2 sentences2004The guidelines used to answer these questions are {** 3 Misc 3d at 295 }the deviation factors set forth in Family Court Act § 413 (1) (f). [FN2]{** 3 Misc 3d at 296 } [*4] We start with the premise that children who have been raised in a long-term marriage ought to continue to be raised in an environment that approximates that which would have existed had the parties remained married ( Zaremba v Zaremba, 237 AD2d 351 [1997]). 2004The guidelines used to answer these questions are the deviation factors set forth in Family Court Act § 413 (1) (f). 2 We start with the premise that children who have been raised in a long-term marriage ought to continue to be raised in an environment that approximates that which would have existed had the parties remained married (Zaremba v Zaremba, 237 AD2d 351 [1997]). | 2 | 2004–2004 |
Shkolnik v. HOSP. FOR JOINT DISEASES ORTHOPEDIC INST.
green
2 sentences2026In any event, the procedure was never performed, and thus any claim arising from a claimed lack of informed consent necessarily fails ( see Public Health Law § 2805-d[1], [3]; Schkolnik v Hospital for Joint Diseases Orthopaedic Institute , 211 AD2d 347 [1st Dept 1995], lv denied 87 NY2d 895 [1995]; see also Buchheim v Sanghavi , 299 AD2d 229 [1st Dept 2002], lv denied 100 NY2d 506 [2003]). 2026In any event, the procedure was never performed, and thus any claim arising from a claimed lack of informed consent necessarily fails (<i>see</i> Public Health Law § 2805-d[1], [3]; <i>Schkolnik v Hospital for Joint Diseases Orthopaedic Institute</i>, 211 AD2d 347 [1st Dept 1995], <i>lv denied</i> 87 NY2d 895 [1995]; <i>see also Buchheim v Sanghavi</i>, 299 AD2d 229 [1st Dept 2002], <i>lv denied</i> 100 NY2d 506 [2003]).</p> <p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.</p> <p>ENTERED: April 16, 2026</p> </div> <div> <footer> <div> <p>Co | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Shkolnik v. Hospital for Joint Diseases Orthopaedic Institute
green
2 sentences2026In any event, the procedure was never performed, and thus any claim arising from a claimed lack of informed consent necessarily fails ( see Public Health Law § 2805-d[1], [3]; Schkolnik v Hospital for Joint Diseases Orthopaedic Institute , 211 AD2d 347 [1st Dept 1995], lv denied 87 NY2d 895 [1995]; see also Buchheim v Sanghavi , 299 AD2d 229 [1st Dept 2002], lv denied 100 NY2d 506 [2003]). 2026In any event, the procedure was never performed, and thus any claim arising from a claimed lack of informed consent necessarily fails (<i>see</i> Public Health Law § 2805-d[1], [3]; <i>Schkolnik v Hospital for Joint Diseases Orthopaedic Institute</i>, 211 AD2d 347 [1st Dept 1995], <i>lv denied</i> 87 NY2d 895 [1995]; <i>see also Buchheim v Sanghavi</i>, 299 AD2d 229 [1st Dept 2002], <i>lv denied</i> 100 NY2d 506 [2003]).</p> <p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.</p> <p>ENTERED: April 16, 2026</p> </div> <div> <footer> <div> <p>Co | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Paul v. Boschenstein
green
2 sentences2025Ordinarily, in a malpractice action, expert testimony is necessary to establish the applicable standard of care, as well as a deviation from such standard, which resulted in injury, unless the matter is within the experience and observation of the trier of fact [*2]( see Paul v Boschenstein , 105 AD2d 248 [1984]; Kim v Zawie , 66 Misc 3d 137[A] , 2020 NY Slip Op 50050[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2020]; Mathew v Jerome L. 2025Ordinarily, in a malpractice action, expert testimony is necessary to establish the applicable standard of care, as well as a deviation from such standard, which resulted in injury, unless the matter is within the experience and observation of the trier of fact [*2]( see Paul v Boschenstein , 105 AD2d 248 [1984]; Kim v Zawie , 66 Misc 3d 137[A] , 2020 NY Slip Op 50050[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2020]; Mathew v Jerome L. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
| Mathew v. Jerome L. Klinger, D.V.M., P. C. green | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Banker v. Hoehn
green
1 sentence2025In addition, given Dr. Brauer's awareness of the risk, his status as a "responsible intermediary" breaks the chain of proximate cause between any failure to warn by Zeltiq and the harm to Silverstein ( see id. at 722 , citing Andre v Mecta Corp. , 186 AD2d 1, 2 [1st Dept 1992], lv denied 85 NY2d 801 [1995]). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Buczek v. Dell & Little, LLP
green
1 sentence2025This report was not in admissible form and therefore was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact that, but for SLF's alleged legal malpractice, plaintiff would have prevailed in the action against the County ( see Buczek v Dell & Little, LLP , 127 AD3d at 1123 ). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
| In re the Estate of Singleton green | 1 | 2024–2024 |
| In re Acquafredda green | 1 | 2024–2024 |
| In re the Estate of Duffy green | 1 | 2024–2024 |
| Mendez v. City of New York green | 1 | 2024–2024 |
| Pober v. Columbia 160 Apartments Corp. green | 1 | 2024–2024 |
| Gross v. Abraham green | 1 | 2024–2024 |
| Alvarado v. Miles green | 1 | 2024–2024 |
| Schwenzfeier v. St. Peter's Health Partners green | 1 | 2023–2023 |
| Hammer v. Rosen green | 1 | 2021–2021 |
| Macey v. Hassam green | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| 530 East 89 Corp. v. Unger green | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| David v. Hutchinson green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| Abakpa v. Martin green | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| Limmer v. Rosenfeld green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| Abalola v. Flower Hospital green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| Burke v. Burke neutral | 1 | 2011–2011 |
| Fotiou v. Goodman green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| Kambat v. St. Francis Hospital green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| Malecki v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. green | 1 | 2005–2005 |
| Kelly v. Kelly green | 1 | 2004–2004 |
| Vuoncino v. Fuhrman neutral | 1 | 2004–2004 |
| Watkins v. Labiak green | 1 | 2004–2004 |
| Hernandez v. State green | 1 | 2003–2003 |
| Capati v. Crunch Fitness International, Inc. neutral | 1 | 2003–2003 |
| Jackson v. County of Sullivan green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| Febesh v. Elcejay Inn Corp. green | 1 | 1995–1995 |
| In re Louis A. green | 1 | 1988–1988 |
| People v. Smith neutral | 1 | 1988–1988 |
| Martinis v. Supreme Court neutral | 1 | 1988–1988 |
| Martinis v. Supreme Court green | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.