I tend to think that the more medical practice summary judgment motion cases you read, the more you see the interplay between no-fault and medical malpractice matters, at least procedurally on motion papers. Here is another one from the First Department
Cupelli v Lawrence Hosp., 2010 NY Slip Op 02000 (1st Dept. 2010)
“The only reference in plaintiff’s expert’s affirmation to Dr. Provenzano states that “[a] note appears in the [hospital] records that [the ER physician] discussed the case with Dr. Provenzano.” As such affirmation simply does not address the medical evidence and opinion contained in Dr. Provenzano’s expert’s affirmation the prima facie sufficiency of which is clear and indeed not challenged by plaintiff on appeal, no issues of fact are raised as to Dr. Provenzano’s malpractice.”
You can translate “medical evidence” (malpractice speak) to “factual basis” (no-fault speak), and opinion (malpractice speak) to “medical rationale” (no-fault speak).
By the way, note that the Appellate Division held that the doctor has to address the medical evidence and the opinion based upon the medical evidence. Plaintiff did not do this in Infinity Health Prods., Ltd. v Mercury Ins. Co., 2010 NY Slip Op 50385(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2010).
