dr michael cross leaving hss

A bitter divorce between a top New York City spine surgeon and his beauty-queen wife was quickly settled Monday after he filed court papers making tawdry accusations that she was moonlighting as. We are concerned that the respect for court orders and statutory mandates and the authoritative voice of the Court of Appeals are undermined each time an untimely motion is considered simply by labeling it a "cross motion" notwithstanding the absence of a reasonable explanation for its untimeliness. He received his medical degree from Vanderbilt University School of Medicine and has been in practice between 11-20 years.. The practice sought to be deterred in Brill is delay occasioned by the submission of a summary judgment motion on the eve of trial, thereby staying proceedings to the prejudice of litigants who have applied their resources in preparation for trial of the issues (Brill, 2 NY3d at 651). Moreover, while there is mention of a surgical option in the 2004 hospital records, the evidence does not show that evaluation of the attendant risks and benefits was undertaken until October 2004, culminating in the December 2004 decision that the associated risk was too great. New York Presbyterian Hospital Internship, Preliminary Year, 2006 . Dr. Michael Cross, MD - Lafayette, IN | Orthopaedic Surgery In addition, the motion court correctly dismissed the second cause of action alleging lack of informed consent as plaintiff's papers did not address this claim. The HSS "cross motion," which runs from page 842 to page 1002 of the record on appeal, is comprised of many items not contained in the HJD motion papers, not the least of which is additional medical records not submitted by HJD. Mr. Michael Brian Cross M.d. Npi 1235397043 Cross appeals from the order of the Supreme Court, They work like a well-oiled machine. "The question remains whether HSS should remain a viable defendant in this case. To lend legal support to plaintiff's theory would place the surgeon in an impossible situation perform a procedure that is deemed to be ill-advised, taking into consideration the individual physician's experience and the available hospital facilities, and be subject to liability for any aggravation of the patient's condition or decline to operate and face liability for refusing to assume the substantial risk that surgery entails. The value of enforcing the terms of the statute as written is that attorneys will make sure their motions are timely filed or that there is a good reason for the lateness. Health insurers that provide access to Hospital for Special Surgery (click the insurance company name for more details) Aetna Affinity by Molina Healthcare Blue Cross Blue Shield - Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield - Horizon Insurance Information for Hospital for Special Surgery | HSS Hospital For Special Surgery. Michael CROSS | Assistant Attending Orthopaedic Surgeon | Hospital for new york, ny zip 10021-099 phone: (212) 774-2114 fax: (646) 797-8298 The provider's authorized official is Michael B Cross . Finally, the majority adopts the trial court's conclusion that the expert's opinion is imprecise with respect to the nature of the alleged deterioration in plaintiff's condition and the extent to which each hospital bears responsibility. 535 E 70th St . There is no suggestion that the narrow interpretation imposed upon the term "good cause" in Brill is meant to apply in circumstances, such as here, where a timely motion is followed by a corresponding motion that is not. Cross is a radiation oncologist. Of course, it must be pointed out that the cross-movant would have good cause for its late motion in that situation, and the cross motion would be evaluated on its merits (see e.g. by Peter Gordon. Lapin relied on Altschuler v Gramatan Mgt., Inc. (27 AD3d 304 [1st Dept 2006]), which held it proper to consider the untimely "cross motion," in particular because it was "largely based" on the same arguments raised in the timely motion for summary judgment, and the same findings would apply for both it and the timely motion. The answer is yes. Plaintiff's MRI was reviewed and it was determined that surgery was not indicated. He met with another HSS doctor on October 22, 2004, who wrote that the plan was to have plaintiff return in November to see Frelinghuysen "for booking of his anterior disc fusion surgery." But most importantly, the dissent's approach is in derogation of CPLR 3212(a). Since trial of this matter was already stayed by HJD's timely motion for summary judgment at the time HSS submitted its marginally late summary judgment motion which raises the same dispositive issue as the timely motion, refusing to entertain the subsequent motion does nothing to avoid the delay of trial and waste of judicial resources, the primary purposes of Brill, by requiring trial of a virtually identical lawsuit ripe for summary disposition. In March of 2002, plaintiff returned to HSS with complaints of pain in his lower back and left leg. New York, NY, 10021. Plaintiff returned to HSS in June 2004 complaining of increasing right shoulder dysfunction and neck pain, and decreasing balance. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Strict and rigid application of Brill is even less understandable given the similarity of the grounds advanced by the respective hospitals in support of their summary judgment motions and the ground upon which disposition rests. On October 1, 2004, plaintiff saw defendant Dr. Peter Frelinghuysen, an orthopaedic surgeon at HSS, who noted that he was "very concerned" that there was only a small chance that surgery would improve plaintiff's condition. Featured Providers Near You Dr. Brian Anthony Cole, MD After review of the MRI, he determined that no further surgery for the cervical spine was indicated and that there should be no lumbar spine surgery "at this time." He was no longer working and was receiving social security disability benefits. Musculoskeletal Infection Society Jorge O. Galante, MD Fellow Research Award On October 1, 2004, plaintiff first met with defendants Peter Frelinghuysen, M.D. Can't say enough about how friendly the staff was at this facility. Michael M. Alexiades, MD Hip and Knee Replacement HSS Main Campus, Uniondale Call for an appointment 212.774.7557 Michael P. Ast, MD Hip and Knee Replacement HSS Main Campus, Paramus Call for an appointment 201.599.8056 Jason L. Blevins, MD Hip and Knee Replacement HSS Main Campus, Westchester Call for an appointment 212.606.1248 Burns v Gonzalez, 307 AD2d 863, 864-865 [1st Dept 2003]; Garrison v City of New York, 300 AD2d 14, 15 [1st Dept 2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 510 [2003]). Find doctor Michael Brian Cross Orthopedic Surgeon physician in White Plains, NY. "[FN4] There are sufficient discrepancies in the record and in the experts' opinions that raise questions of fact regarding HSS's course of treatment beginning in 2004, if not earlier. There is nothing in the language of the statute to suggest this and it opens the door to abuse; once one movant has timely filed, any other party can argue that its motion, no matter when filed, should be addressed. The doctor also noted that plaintiff did not objectively regain any strength or function after having the surgery at Mt. HSS argued to the motion court, as it does to this Court, that its motion should be considered on the merits because it merely presents the same arguments made by HJD. PDF Expert Opinion provided by Dr. Michael Cross Education VANDERBILT UNIV SCH OF MED, Medical School 2006 The problem in the case at bar is that HSS's motion, in addition to being untimely, is not a true cross motion. Mystery solved: Extell is building a 30-story, 400,000-square-foot medical tower. Dr. Michael Cross, MD works in New York, NY as an Orthopedic Surgery Specialist and has 16 years experience. Removal of Skunks, Raccoons, Squirrels, Bats, Snakes, and More! Co., LLC, 48 AD3d 337, 337 [1st Dept 2008]; Alexander v Gordon, 95 AD3d 1245, 1246-1247 [2d Dept 2012]; Grande v Peteroy, 39 AD3d 590, 591-592 [2d Dept 2007]). The motion by HJD was submitted on November 11, 2011, three days before the deadline of November 14, 2011 imposed by the motion court under CPLR 3212(a). Differences necessarily exist because [plaintiff] was a patient at HSS for an extended time before he came to [HJD]. Dr. Michael Cross, MD, Orthopedic Surgery Specialist - New York, NY New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J. Footnote 3: In Cadichon v Facelle (18 NY3d 230 [2011]), the Court reversed a "ministerial" dismissal based on the failure to timely file the note of issue because the trial court did not provide notice to the parties or issue a formal order; the decision notes that the record showed that neither set of parties acted "with expediency in moving the case forward," and that deadlines must not be disregarded (id. In July, 2005, plaintiff saw orthopaedic surgeon Dr. Andrew Hecht of Mt. He graduated medical school from Vanderbilt University as a member of the Alpha Omega Alpha Medical Honor Society. Cross is an orthopedist in Lafayette, Indiana. Dr. Michael Cross' Practice at the HSS Pavilion 541 East 71st Street New York, NY 10021 Physicians at this location Specialties Family Medicine Orthopedic Spine Surgery Orthopedic Surgery. At [HJD] he was a patient from only February 2005 to September 2005, and he was also a patient at Mt. In other words, Brill calls on the courts to lead by enforcing the words of the statute, rather than let attorney practice slowly eat away at the integrity of our judicial system. Indeed, in our view, the dissent wrongly interprets the statute by claiming that the "good cause shown" prong is not always a part of the CPLR 3212(a) analysis. [*17]. carlson extra wide pet gate with lift handle prince of peace premium jasmine green tea In response, plaintiff's expert merely averred that if the subject cervical revision surgery had been performed earlier, plaintiff's ultimate outcome would have been substantially improved and he would not have sustained such a severe degree of weakness and loss of function of his right upper extremity. Find expert care and book online. Contact; Help; Partners; Blog; Press; Product; . Plaintiff's expert does not even address the question of whether, taking plaintiff's obviously compromised physical condition into account, it was a departure from good and accepted medical practice to pursue a conservative course of treatment rather than assume the risk of surgical intervention. Kershaw v Hospital for Special Surgery :: 2013 :: New York Appellate It is up to the litigant to show the court why the rule should be flexible in the particular circumstances, or, in the words of the statute, that there is "good cause shown" for the delay. HSS admitted that its motion seeking summary judgment and dismissal of the complaint as against it was filed nearly two months after the court-imposed deadline for making dispositive motions,[FN2] but argued that it should be considered because it sought relief on the same issues raised in codefendant HJD's timely motion. However, it is a well-established rule of statutory construction that a court should avoid any interpretation that leads to absurd and unintended consequences (see Matter of Friedman-Kien v City of New York, 92 AD2d 827, 828-829 [1983], affd 61 NY2d 923 [1984], citing Matter of Chatlos v McGoldrick, 302 NY 380, 387-388 [1951]; McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 1, Statutes, 92, 145, 147). The best working with the best. By notice of cross motion dated January 10, 2012, HSS moved for summary judgment and dismissal, relying on HJD's expert's affidavit and that of defendant Girardi. In June 2004, plaintiff returned to HSS with continuing complaints of progressive right shoulder weakness, increased neck pain and decreased balance. Both seek dismissal of the complaint on the identical ground that it was not a departure from good and accepted medical practice to forego surgery in favor of a conservative treatment plan, i.e., based on the severity of plaintiff's existing spinal disease and the low prospect of improving his condition, the decision not to subject plaintiff to the risk of quadriplegia or death was a sound medical decision. Here, HJD's submission of its moving papers a mere three days before the final date set by the trial court contravenes the spirit of Brill by depriving HSS of an adequate opportunity to timely file its own application for similar relief because, at such point in time, HSS is presumed to have been devoting its resources to preparation for trial (Brill, 2 NY2d at 651). In our view, Brill expresses the Court's overall desire to curb "sloppy" litigation practices, one of them being late summary judgment motions. Ins. ), entered July 16, 2012, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted the summary judgment motion of defendants Hospital for Special Surgery, Peter Frelinghuysen, and Federico Pablo Girardi (collectively HSS) only to the extent of dismissing plaintiff's claim of lack of informed consent, and otherwise denied the motion, and from the judgment of the same court and Justice, entered August 20, 2012, dismissing the complaint as against defendant New York University Medical Center Hospital for Joint Diseases. Sinai orthopedic surgeon observed that he did not "see a substantial neurologic improvement on [his] objective testing, but the patient does feel subjectively like he is improving.". ), entered July 16, 2012, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted the summary judgment motion of defendants Hospital for Special Surgery, Peter Frelinghuysen, and Federico Pablo Girardi (collectively HSS) only to the extent of Dr. Michael Ast, MD | Paramus, NJ | Orthopedic Surgeon | Vitals Finally, we note the dissent's concern that allowing this litigation to proceed based on plaintiff's particular theory of negligence could result in placing surgeons in an impossible situation either of performing a procedure that is deemed ill-advised and being subject to any liability for aggravation of a condition, or declining and being subject to liability for refusing to [*11]assume the risk that the surgery entails. An overly expansive application of Brill invites unintended consequences following from the Legislature's 1996 amendment of CPLR 3212(a). This surgeon was submitted to G.O.S. Co-Chief of the Sports Medicine and Shoulder Service, and John Cavanaugh, PT, MEd, ATC, SCS, Clinical Supervisor, HSS Sports Rehabilitation and Performance Center, at the 2012 Summer Olympic. To the extent that good cause is even material under these circumstances, it is the sheer impossibility of preparing a dispositive motion during the remaining time established by the court for its submission. Find Hospital for Special Surgery on the . The cross movant may rely on the papers submitted with the main motion to support the relief sought. Dr. Michael A. Cross, MD | Radiation Oncologist | US News Doctors . He attended Washington University in St. Louis for his undergraduate education, where he double majored in chemistry and mathematics/statistics and played varsity football. Sinai, and the only change in his condition was numbness in his right arm and hand, likely due to the development of carpal tunnel syndrome. Although the system mainly runs in the . The course adopted by plaintiff of locating a medical team possessing the requisite skills at a hospital equipped with the appropriate facilities represents a seemingly optimal outcome which, as a matter of policy, should not be compromised by the threat of litigation. Dr. Michael B. By making a cross motion, the party saves an extra day in court, and quite possibly the time and trouble of amassing fresh proof, if it happens that all or part of the evidentiary foundation on which the cross motion is based has already been produced for consideration (Patrick M. Connors, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C2215:1, 2215:2). Accordingly, the order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J. 35 Mayflower Avenue Unit B Stamford, CT 06906 Phone +1 (212) 987-OSET (6738) CONTACT US . [FN3] Decided on December 24, 2013 Dr. Cross completed his internship at New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center in 2007 and his residency at Hospital for Special Surgery in New York in 2012 where he was awarded the Russell Warren Basic Science Research Award and the Jean McDaniel Award, which is given to the Chief Resident who best demonstrates leadership, professionalism and ethics in the care of patients.

Breaking News In Eunice Louisiana, Egyptian Musk Incense Benefits, Edmonton Elks Shareholders, Hemolytic Vs Non Hemolytic Transfusion Reaction, Liste De Musicien Congolais Le Plus Riche 2020, Articles D