Published on:

NY Appellate Court Confirms Improper Care of Infant, Judgement for the Plaintiff


Queens Birth Injury 15

This case is being heard in the Special Term of the Queens County Supreme Court. The original plaintiffs of the case are John Joseph Shea III, who is an infant under 14 years old, represented by his guardian John Joseph Shea II and John Joseph Shea II individually. The defendants are Otto Gitlin, d/b/a Queens Memorial Hospital, Jane Stidolph (first name is fictitious), and Dr. John Uvetich. Stidolph and Dr. Uvetich are third party plaintiffs versus the third party defendants Dr. Samuel Weiner and Dr. S.J. Rosoff.

Third Party Case

The third party defendants, Dr. Weiner and Dr. Rosoff are seeking dismissal of the third party grievance based on insufficiency in the case.

Primary Cause of Action

The primary complaint in this case is the first cause of action brought against defendant Gitlin. A New York Injury Lawyer said this action states that the infant plaintiff was born at a privately owned hospital that is controlled by Gitlin. The infant was full and normally developed at birth. After the infant was delivered, defendant Stidolph took the infant into her care. Stidolph is not registered as a nurse and while the infant was in her care she carelessly treated him and caused him to be painfully, severely, mutilated, and disfigured and permanently injured (medical malpractice).

The plaintiff also states that Dr. Uvetich was employed by defendant Gitlin and Uvetich was not licensed for practice of medicine in New York. The plaintiffs state that Dr. Uvetich tried to conceal or mend the injuries inflicted on the infant, without consulting the infant’s parents. Additionally, the plaintiffs state that he was negligent in his care for the infant and caused injury to the baby. Gitlin is negligent in the case by failing to provide proper regulations in regard to the care of infants after they are delivered and for failing to hire personnel that are competent.

Second Cause of Action

The second cause of action is brought against defendant Stidolph alleges the previous facts and also alleges that the defendant Stidolph is negligent by taking a position at the hospital that she was aware that she was not qualified for. It is alleged that she did not perform her work with care and that she tried to cover up her wrongful act.

Third Cause of Action

The third cause of action is against defendant Uvetich and realleges the facts stated above. In addition, the plaintiffs allege that the defendant Uvetich is negligent by trying to perform an operation that he was not properly licensed to perform. Additionally, a Queens Personal Injury Lawyer said it is alleged that he failed to properly report the incident to the parents of the baby, and attempted to cover up the injury to the infant child.

Case Discussion and Verdict

The first three actions are all in regard to the infant plaintiff. There is a fourth cause of action made by the infant’s father that allege all of the above and claim of loss of services.

The third party plaintiffs and defendants allege that the two third party defendants are licensed physicians and were hired by the infant’s mother to perform a Caesarean operation. A Suffolk County Personal Injury Lawyer said they were given courtesy privileges at Gitlin’s Hospital. It is affirmed that the infant was born healthy, but alleged that the post birth treatment was not reasonable and at the time the injury to the infant occurred the third party defendants were still responsible for his care.

After reviewing the case the motion for dismissal for the third party defendants is granted.

If you are involved in any type of medical malpractice suit contact Stephen Bilkis & Associates for help. We are happy to discuss your case with you in a free consultation. Our offices are located throughout the metropolitan area of Manhattan.

Contact Information