Physicians and Surgeons - Malpractice - Standard of Care - Failure to Address Defense Experts' Opinions or Medical Record Contradictions

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Joseph E. Capella, J.), entered on or about June 3, 2024, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted the motion of defendants Corey Hunter, M.D., and Ainsworth Institute of Pain Management, PLLC for summary judgment dismissing the complaint to the extent that it alleged that defendants committed medical malpractice based on their post-operative care of plaintiff, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We decline to consider plaintiff's arguments regarding the qualifications of defendants' experts, Christopher Gharibo, M.D., and Alan Z. Segal, M.D., because they are unpreserved (see Lopez v Gramuglia, 133 AD3d 424, 424 [1st Dept 2015]; Edmund v Albert Einstein Hosp., 118 AD3d 578, 579 [1st Dept 2014], lv denied 27 NY3d 910 [2016]).

Defendants satisfied their prima facie burden by submitting defendant Dr. Hunter's deposition testimony, plaintiff's medical records, and Dr. Gharibo and Dr. Segal's expert affirmations, both of which opined that defendants did not deviate from the standard of care. In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact. The affirmation of plaintiff's expert, Allan Hausknecht, M.D., a board-certified neurologist, failed to address or review the specific opinions of Drs. Gharibo and Segal, instead offering conclusions contradicted by the medical records (see Cabrera v Golden, 231 AD3d 149, 155 [1st Dept 2024]). Dr. Hausknecht opined that plaintiff's headache signaled complications; however, the medical records show no neurological deficits or complaints of headache immediately after the procedure. Although Dr. Hausknecht opined that plaintiff's headache, mild numbness, and transient weakness in her lower extremities were warning signs of complications, he never addressed defendants' experts' opinion that they were normal side effects. He also ignored Dr. Gharibo's opinion that a blood patch would have been premature on October 30 and 31, 2017, and failed to explain how performing a blood patch at that time would have changed plaintiff's outcome. Concur—Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Friedman, Pitt-Burke, Rosado, Chan, JJ.