Palacio v. Weissberg
Opinion of the Court
βIn consolidated actions to recover
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs, payable by the appellants appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
The Supreme Court properly denied summary judgment to the defendants. Although a determination against a defendant in an action to recover fees for the rendering of professional services precludes the commencement of a malpractice action by that defendant with regard to the same services (see, Pirog v Ingber, 203 AD2d 348), the Supreme Court properly found that the infant plaintiff here was not in privity with her father and guardian, the defendant in the prior fee action, so as to preclude the commencement of her instant medical malpractice action (cf., Weiner v Greyhound Bus Lines, 55 AD2d 189). Under these circumstances, the application by the defendant Huntington Hospital Association to amend its answer was properly denied. Sullivan, J. P., Friedmann, Florio and Mc-Ginity, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.