Firm Update No. 2026-22本所动态 2026-22 号

In re Estate’s Medical Malpractice Action Against a Manhattan Hospital: A Stalled Case Saved From Dismissal and Brought to the Trial Calendar遗产对曼哈顿一家医院提起的医疗事故诉讼：停滞多年的案件免于被驳回并进入审判日程

Practice领域: Civil Litigation民事诉讼
Jurisdiction管辖: Supreme Court of the State of New York, Queens County, Medical Malpractice Part纽约州最高法院皇后区分院医疗事故庭
Our role本所角色: Counsel to the estate (substituted in 2022)遗产代理律师（2022年接手）
Status进展: Pending; note of issue filed May 2026; defendants’ summary judgment motion returnable Nov. 25, 2026审理中；2026年5月提交开庭登记；被告简易判决动议定于2026年11月25日审理

IFacts事实

The administrator of a deceased patient's estate sued a Manhattan hospital and one of its physicians in 2016, alleging medical malpractice and lack of informed consent in the patient's care. The defendants answered and denied liability. In October 2022 the family replaced its prior counsel with Xu Law Offices, and the defendants soon served a demand to resume prosecution and then moved to dismiss the case for failure to prosecute.一名已故病人的遗产管理人于2016年起诉曼哈顿一家医院及其一名医生，指称其在诊疗中存在医疗过失及未尽告知同意义务。被告作出答辩，否认责任。2022年10月，家属以本所替换原代理律师；被告随即送达恢复诉讼的催告，其后以原告怠于诉讼为由申请驳回起诉。

IIPleadings诉辩文书

Complaint (May 2016). Filed by the estate's prior counsel, with a certificate of merit. Two causes of action: medical malpractice, seeking damages for the patient's conscious pain and suffering, and lack of informed consent under Public Health Law § 2805-d.起诉状（2016年5月）。由遗产原代理律师提交，并附有理据证明。共两项诉因：医疗过失（就病人生前有意识的痛苦请求赔偿）；以及依《公共卫生法》第2805-d条的未尽告知同意义务。

Answers (August 2016). The hospital and the physician each denied liability and pleaded nine affirmative defenses: collateral-source offset (CPLR 4545); reduction for any settlement (General Obligations Law § 15-108); culpable conduct of third parties; culpable conduct of the patient; failure to state a cause of action; the statutory defenses to an informed-consent claim; the statute of limitations; the plaintiff's capacity to sue; and failure to mitigate.答辩状（2016年8月）。医院及医生均否认责任，并提出九项积极抗辩：间接来源抵销（CPLR第4545条）；按任何和解金额扣减（《一般义务法》第15-108条）；第三方过错；病人本人过错；未陈述诉因；针对告知同意请求的法定抗辩；诉讼时效；原告诉讼资格；以及未减轻损失。

IIIMotions and Court Orders动议及法院裁定

Mot. Seq. 001 (plaintiff, March 2023). Leave to file the notice of medical malpractice late under CPLR 3406(a). Granted July 18, 2023; the notice was deemed timely.第001号动议（原告，2023年3月）。依CPLR第3406(a)条申请准许逾期提交医疗事故通知。法院于2023年7月18日批准，视该通知为及时提交。

Mot. Seq. 002 (defendants, April 2023). Dismissal for failure to prosecute under CPLR 3216, after a 90-day demand. Denied October 20, 2023.第002号动议（被告，2023年4月）。在送达90日催告后，依CPLR第3216条以怠于诉讼为由申请驳回。法院于2023年10月20日驳回。

Mot. Seq. 003 (defendants, October 2023). Leave to renew and reargue the denial. Denied December 19, 2023; the court found no new facts and no misapprehended point of fact or law.第003号动议（被告，2023年10月）。申请重审及重新辩论。法院于2023年12月19日驳回，认定无新事实，亦无误解事实或法律之处。

Mot. Seq. 004 (defendants, April 2024). To strike the complaint under CPLR 3126 or compel discovery under CPLR 3124. The estate opposed. The parties then entered a so-ordered discovery schedule, and the motion was denied as moot on May 10, 2024.第004号动议（被告，2024年4月）。依CPLR第3126条申请撤销起诉状，或依第3124条强制证据开示。遗产方提出反对。双方随后订立经法院批准的证据开示时间表，该动议于2024年5月10日因无实际意义被驳回。

Discovery and the note of issue. Party and non-party depositions and paper discovery were completed under a series of so-ordered stipulations from 2024 to early 2026. On May 4, 2026 the court deemed discovery complete and directed the note of issue to be filed by May 11, 2026. The firm filed the note of issue with a jury demand on May 10, 2026.证据开示及开庭登记。2024年至2026年初，依一系列经法院批准的协议完成了当事人及非当事人取证及书面证据开示。2026年5月4日，法院认定证据开示完毕，并责令于2026年5月11日前提交开庭登记。本所于2026年5月10日提交开庭登记并要求陪审团审理。

Mot. Seq. 005 (defendants, September 4, 2026). Summary judgment dismissing the complaint under CPLR 3212, supported by an expert affirmation. By so-ordered stipulation of October 6, 2026, the motion and the pretrial conference were adjourned to November 25, 2026, with the estate's opposition due November 11 and the reply due November 24.第005号动议（被告，2026年9月4日）。依CPLR第3212条申请简易判决驳回起诉，并附专家宣誓陈述。依2026年10月6日经法院批准的协议，该动议及审前会议延期至2026年11月25日，遗产方反对意见于11月11日到期，被告答复于11月24日到期。

IVQuestions Presented争议问题

Can a medical malpractice action that sat inactive for years still be heard on its merits, and what must new counsel do to keep it alive?多年未推进的医疗事故诉讼能否仍获实体审理？新任律师须采取哪些步骤才能保住案件？

VRelevant Law相关法律

CPLR 3406(a): notice of medical malpractice action; extension of timeCPLR 3406(a)：医疗过失诉讼通知；延期

CPLR 3216: want of prosecution; 90-day demand; justifiable excuse; potentially meritorious claimCPLR 3216：怠于诉讼；90日催告；正当理由；可能成立之请求

Baczkowski v. Collins Constr. Co., 89 N.Y.2d 499 (1997): dismissal for neglect to prosecute; statutory preconditions; extremely forgiving standardBaczkowski v. Collins Constr. Co., 89 N.Y.2d 499 (1997)：因怠于诉讼驳回；法定前提条件；极宽松标准

CPLR 2221: reargument; renewal; matters overlooked or misapprehended; new factsCPLR 2221：重新辩论；重新审理；被忽略或误解之事项；新事实

CPLR 3212: summary judgment; joinder of issue; triable issue of factCPLR 3212：简易判决；争点形成；可审理之事实争点

N.Y. Pub. Health Law § 2805-d: lack of informed consent; reasonably foreseeable risks; proximate causeN.Y. Pub. Health Law § 2805-d：缺乏知情同意；合理可预见风险；近因

CPLR 3124, 3126: motion to compel disclosure; penalties for refusal to disclose; preclusion; striking of pleadingsCPLR 3124, 3126：强制披露动议；拒绝披露之制裁；排除证据；删除诉状

Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320 (1986): summary judgment burden; prima facie showing; triable issue of fact; burden shiftingAlvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320 (1986)：简易判决举证责任；初步证明；可审理之事实争点；举证责任转移

VICurrent Stage当前阶段

The case is on the trial calendar of the Medical Malpractice Part. The defendants' summary judgment motion and a pretrial conference are set for November 25, 2026. No trial date has been set.案件已列入医疗事故庭的审判日程。被告的简易判决动议及审前会议定于2026年11月25日。尚未确定开庭日期。

Open issues. Summary judgment burden-shifting in medical malpractice; departure from accepted practice and proximate cause; competing expert affirmations and triable issues of fact; informed consent under Public Health Law § 2805-d and its objective reasonable-person standard.待决问题。医疗事故简易判决中的举证责任转移；偏离公认诊疗规范及近因；相互冲突的专家宣誓陈述及可供审理的事实争议；《公共卫生法》第2805-d条下的告知同意及其客观合理人标准。

Client details are withheld to protect confidentiality. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.为保护客户隐私，相关信息已隐去。过往结果不保证类似案件的结果。