Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Vetrone ex rel. Vetrone v. Winthrop University Hosp.

Other Lower Courts

December 6, 2007

JOHN VETRONE, deceased, by Angeline Vetrone, as Administratrix of the Estate of the deceased, ANGELINE VETRONE, Individually, Plaintiff,
v.
Winthrop University Hospital, GEORGE L. HINES, M.D., FEDERICO DOCTOR, M.D. HECTOR DOURRON, M.D., TIMOTHY MANONI, M.D., MAN HON, M.D., WILLIAM PURTILL, M.D., "JOHN" KOZOLOWSKI, M.D. and NATALIE KLEIN, M.D., Defendants.

Editorial Note:

This case is not published in a printed volume and its disposition appears in a table in the reporter.

COUNSEL

Birbrower, Beldock Margolis, P.C., Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Farley Glockner, LLP, By: Mark Khavkin, Esq., Attorneys for Defendant

Timothy Manoni, M.D., Geisler Gabriele, LLP, Attorneys for Defendants

George L. Hines, M.D., Man Hon, M.D. and William Purtill, M.D.

Furey, Kerley, Walsh, Matera Cinquemani, P.C.Attorney for Defendants

Winthrop University Hospital, Federico Doctor, M.D. and Natalie Klein, M.D.

OPINION

HON. DANIEL PALMIERI, Acting Supreme Court Justice

The motion by defendant Timothy Manoni, M.D. for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212 (Seq. no. 3) is denied. The motion by defendants George L. Hines, M.D., Man Hon, M.D., and William Purtill, M.D. for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212 is granted, and the complaint is dismissed as against these defendants.

In this medical malpractice action the plaintiff's decedent John Vetrone, 75 years old, was admitted to Winthrop University Hospital for repair of an endovascular aortic aneurysm in the abdominal aorta. Vetrone suffered from coronary artery disease, pulmonary hypertension and left ventricular dsyfunction, and had previously undergone cardiac catheterization. Dr. Hines, a vascular surgeon, initially saw the patient after the aneurysm had been revealed by the catheterization. Dr. Hon, a radiologist, confirmed the diagnosis. Dr. Hines discussed the procedure he intended to use with Vetrone, which was placement of an endograft stent in the affected vessel. Dr. Hines testified at his examination before trial that the purpose of the stent was to exclude the aneurysm from the blood's circulation. He obtained Vetrone's consent to perform the operation.

The procedure took place on November 8, 2000. Dr. Hines performed the operation as principal surgeon. After an initial attempt at placement through the femoral artery was blocked by a twist in that vessel, a second incision was made and he placed the stent in the aortic artery via the iliac artery, which was closer to the aneurysm. He was assisted by Dr. Purtill, another vascular surgeon. Dr. Hon was also present, as was Dr. Manoni, also a vascular surgeon, who had asked to "scrub in"for the surgery and was listed as first assistant in the operative report. [1] Dr. Manoni was Board certified in general surgery, and was "board eligible" for vascular surgery. Dr. Manoni testified that became Board certified in vascular surgery in either 2000 or 2001.

The procedure was successfully completed, and Dr. Hines and Dr. Purtill left the room. Although the record is not perfectly clear on this point, it is apparent that Dr. Manoni had been asked or volunteered to close, but it is undisputed that he undertook the task. He removed the surgical packing and noticed a pool of venous (dark) blood pooling in the pelvis. The blood was coming from a small hole in the iliac vein, which Dr. Manoni testified occurred during the surgery. Dr. Manoni decided to close the opening with a single stitch. However, the vein tore when he attempted to tie the knot down, and began to bleed at a much greater rate than it had previously. Dr. Manoni testified ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.