"Email and Continuous Treatment in Medical Malpractice Actions," New York Law Journal May 31, 2016
“The marriage of electronic communications and the professional community drastically altered the way we conduct business,” write Ellen H. Greiper and Scott P. Eisenberg, lawyers in Goldberg Segalla’s General Liability Practice Group. “However, with the honeymoon phase behind us, the real-world implications of email being the preferred choice of communication are starting to be felt in all professions, with ours being no exception.”
In this article, Ellen and Scott examine the effect emails have upon accrual dates of statutes of limitations. “While the majority of accrual dates are firmly fixed and easily defined by Article 2 of the CPLR,” they write, “claims of legal or medical malpractice often place accrual dates in somewhat of a gray area due to the doctrines of ‘continuous representation’ and ‘continuous treatment.’ Professionals’ widespread use of email has only exacerbated this problem.”
The authors explore recent decisions examining “whether a medical provider can treat a patient by way of email,” including the influential Sturman v. Wagner Davis, P.C. decision and the opinion in Caesar v. Brookman, which ruled upon the issue of when the statute of limitations in a podiatric malpractice action began to run.
Read the article here:
- “Email and Continuous Treatment in Medical Malpractice Actions,” New York Law Journal, May 31, 2016 (subscription required)