Justice Joan Lobis

Physician Nowygrod moved for summary judgment dismissing patient Aylon’s medical malpractice action against him. Aylon was diagnosed with uterine cancer. During a hysterectomy she experienced excessive bleeding and vascular surgeon Nowygrod was called in for an emergency consultation. He noted he found Aylon’s internal and external iliac veins torn on both sides, and deep in the posterior pelvis. He continued to operate on Aylon several times, but Aylon sued several years thereafter claiming the doctors, including Nowygrod, committed malpractice, and their conduct proximately caused her injuries. Nowygrod’s expert opined he did not negligently treat Aylon, cause or contribute to her alleged injuries. Aylon’s expert opined Nowygrod’s actions caused Aylon’s injuries. The court stated Nowygrod met his prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment, noting his expert’s conclusions were supported by specific, exhaustive references to the medical records. It also found only some of the experts’ disagreements were meritorious, finding Nowygrod was entitled to summary judgment on the lack of informed consent issue. Yet, the court found genuine issues of material fact remained if Nowygrod committed malpractice or proximately caused Aylon’s injuries.