Summary Judgment for Evan Lyman on COVID-19 Impacted Care Case

Congratulations to Evan on this win on a high exposure COVID-19 impacted care case. 

This New York County case broadly alleges that our client, a primary care physician, should have diagnosed a spinal compression between March and April 2020; and that as a result, a tumor compressing the spine was allowed to grow until May 2020, resulting in cauda equina syndrome, a severe debilitating spinal injury. 

 In moving for summary judgment, Evan asserted not only that our client met the standard of care in all respects; Evan further argued that as the care was rendered in March and April of 2020, in Washington Heights at the height of the pandemic that our clients were entitled to immunity under the original version of the Covid-19 immunity law. The original version of the Covid-19 immunity law was unique in that the statute included a physician's efforts in “arranging for” medical services, in addition to actual treatment. The phrase “arranging for” was deleted from the statutory text in August 2020; but still applicable to the earlier time frame.

Plaintiff opposed our motion with support from an expert in neurosurgery.  While we believe Evan handily defeated the opposition in his reply affirmation, the medical issues were not decisive in the courts ruling.

More specifically, the Court dismissed the case, holding that the original version of New York's Covid-19 immunity law, albeit repealed shortly after, applied retroactively to our physician client's attempt at arranging for an MRI in March and April of 2020; and moreover, that our client's efforts in arranging for a diagnostic MRI was impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic in March and April of 2020.