Exhibit,Appendix: Theresa Robinson, Derek Robinson v. Northwell Health, Inc., Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Deepak Nanda, M.D., P.C., Deepak Nanda M.D., Emmanuel M. Pafos M.D.

On November 22, 2018 a Exhibit,Appendix was filed involving a dispute between Derek Robinson, Theresa Robinson, and Deepak Nanda M.D., Deepak Nanda, M.D., P.C., Emmanuel M. Pafos M.D., Long Island Jewish Medical Center, Northwell Health, Inc., for Torts - Medical, Dental, or Podiatrist Malpractice in the District Court of Queens County.

Preview
FILED:
..........,... QUEENS
--.........,.. COUNTY
---., - - CLERK
-......- .01/08/2020
, , .-, ....... 02:20
-- . .... PM INDEX NO. 717964/2018
...,
NY SCEF
NYSCEF DOC.
DOC. NO.NO. 28
62 RECEIVED
RECEIVED NYSCEF:
NYSCEF: 07/02/2019
01/08/2020

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF QUEENS
___.--------
-----------X
THERESA ROBINSON and DEREK ROBINSON,

Index No.:
Plaintilis,
717964/2018

- against -
BILL OF PARTICULARS

NORTHWELL HEALTH, INC., LONG ISLAND JEWISH
MEDICAL CENTER, DEEPAK NANDA, M.D., P.C., DEEPAK
NANADA, M.D., and EMMANUEL M. PAFOS, M.D.,

Defendants.
X

Plaintiffs THERESA ROBINSON and DEREK ROBINSON, by and through their
attorneys, THE PAGLINAWAN FIRM, P.C., as and for a bill of particulars in response to the
demands of defendant NORTHWELL HEALTH, INC., ("thisanswering Defendant"), state, pnor
to any discovery and depositions in thismatter, as follows:

1. The dates and times of the day of the alleged negligent acts and/or omiss|cns which will
be alleged against the defendant(s) herein.

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that itcalls for

evidênt|ary material or information in the form of,or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
and, therefore, such demand is overly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a billof
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Cir. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), afd, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978). Without

waiving these objections, the negligent acts and omissions of the answering defendant
occurred from April 12, 2016 to April 17, 2016.

2. The location of the alleged negligent acts and/or omissions charged against the

defendant(s) herein.

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that it calls for

evidentiary material or information in the form of, or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
and, therefore, such demand isoverly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a bill of
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), ard, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978). Without

waiving these objections, the negligent acts and omissions of the answering defendant
occurred from April 12, 2016 to April 17, 2016 at LONG ISLAND JEWISH MEDICAL
CENTER, located at 270-05 76th Avenue, New Hyde Park, NY 11040.

3. A statement of each and every act of negligence, commission or omission which you will
claim at the basis of the alleged malpractice of the defendant(s) herein.

1 nF 1'rf
FILED: INDEX NO. 717964/2018
. .........-
. ,QUEENS
-.....,--- COUNTY
---... - CLERK
-.........- -01/08/2020
, , --, ......., 02:20
-., . ..,. PM
...

NYSCEF DOC.
NYSCEF DOC. NO.NO. 2862 RECEIVED
RECEIVED NYSCEF:
NYSCEF: 07/02 /2019
01/08/2020

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that it calls for

evidentiary material or information in the form of, or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
and, therefore, such demand is overly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a billof
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), ard, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978). Without

waiving the above objections, itwill be claimed at trialthat this answering departed from
good and accepted standards of care in treating plaintiff Theresa Robinson in the

following respects: failing to have in effect written and policies and procedures related to

(a) communications between nurses and physicians regarding patients in the labor and

delivery unit, (b) proper monitoring of patients in the labor and delivery unit, (c) staffing of
the labor and delivery unit, (d) performance of c-sections in the hospital, (e) reporting of
abnormal findings in the labor and delivery unit, (f)iñssrtion of Foley catheters in the
labor and delivery unit, (g) access to patient's medical records, (h) taking of a patient's
complete medical, gynecological, and obstetrical history in the labor and delivery unit,
and (i)proper documentation of events in the operating room; failing to follow itswritten
and policies and procedures related to (a) communications between nurses and
physicians regarding patients in the labor and delivery unit, (b) proper monitoring of
patients in the labor and delivery unit, (c) staffing of the labor and delivery unit, (d)
performance of o-sections in the hospital, (e) reporting of abnormal findings in the labor
and delivery unit, (f)insertion of Foley catheters in the labor and delivery unit, (g) access
to patient's medical records, (h) taking of a patient's complete medical, gynecological,
and obstetrical history in the labor and delivery unit, and (i)proper documentation of
events in the operating room; negligently hiring personnel without the requisite
knowledge and expertise to care for her; failingto prevent her uterine rupture during
labor; negligently causing her bladder Injury; failing to perform a timely C-section on her;
negligently delaying the C-section; failing to sufficiently monitor her during her labor;
failing to timely diagnose her uterine rupture; failing to take her proper obstetricai and
nurses'
gynecological history; failing take heed of the observations and notes regarding
her condition to diagnose her bladder to follow-
during labor; failing timely injury; falling
up her condition during labor; negligently attempting vaginal delivery to her despite her
previous history of delivering by c-section; failing to anticipate her abdominal adhesions
in lightof her past gynecological and obstetrical history; and failing to advise her of the
material risks of, benefits of, and altematives to the vaginal delivery and c-section.

4. State the names of each and every person who performed such acts or failed to act; If
the names are not known, describe the physical appearance with sufficient clarity for

ready identification and state the occupation of each such person.

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that itcalls for

evidentiary material or information in the form of, or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
and, therefore, such demand is overly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a billof
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), ard, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978). Without

waiving these objections, other than the co-defendants and those whose names appear
defendants'
in the medical records, Plaintiffs are not aware of names of persons who
performed such acts.
FILED:
... .,.-..,...
. QUEENS
--........ -...
COUNTY ._ CLERK
-..,-- 01/08/2020
- , , ... ......, 02:20
..... .... PM INDEX NO. 717964/2018
...,
NYSCEF
NYSCEF DOC
DOC.. NO.
NO. 28
62 RECEIVED
RECEIVED NYSCEF:
NYSCEF: 01/08/2020
07/02/2019

5. State whether or not any claim is made as to improper or defective equipment and ifso
identify the equipment and state the defective conditions.

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that itcalls for

evidentiary material or information in the form of,or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
and, therefore, such demand isoverly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a billof
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), aff'd, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978). Without
waiving these objections, no claim for improper or defective equipment is being made in
this matter.

6. Give a statement of the accepted medical practices, customs and medical standards
which itis claimed were violated/departed from by the answering defendant.

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that itcalls for

evidentiary material or information in the form of, or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
and, therefore, such demand is overly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a billof
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), aff'd, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978).

7. Ifthe plaintiff(s) complains that the defendant(s) ignored signs, symptoms, made an
erroneous diagnosis, afrmded improper treatment, administered improper and/or
contralndicated drugs in an incorrect dosage, failed to take or administer tests or

improperly took and administered tests, state:

(a) The complaints, signs, symptoms that the defendant(s) ignored;

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that itcalls for

svidsñt|ary material or information in the form of, or to be gleaned from, expert testimcay
and, therefore, such demand is overly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a bill
of
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Crnty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), affd, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978). Without

waiving the above objections, itwillbe claimed at trial that this answering departed from
good and accepted standards of care in treating plaintiffTheresa Robinson in the

following respects: failing to prevent her uterine rupture during labor; negligently causing
her bladder injury; failingto perform a timely C-section on her; negligently delaying the
C-section; failing to sufficiently monitor her during her labor; failing to timely diagnose
her uterine rupture; failing to take her proper obstetrical and gynecological history; failing
nurses'
take heed of the observations and notes regarding her condition during labor;
failing to timely diagnose her bladder injury; failing to follow-up her condition during
labor; negligently attempt|ñg vaginal delivery to her despite her previous history of

delivering by c-section; failing to anticipate her abdominal adhesions in light of her past
gynecological and obstetrical history; and failing to advise her of the material risks of,
benefits of, and alternatives to the vaginal delivery and c-section.
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 01/08/2020 02:20 PM INDEX NO. 717964/2018
NYSCEF
NYSCEF DOC
DOC. . NO
NO.. 262
8 RECEIVED
RECEIVED NYSCEF
NYSCEF: : 001/08/2020
7/ 02 / 2 019

(b) In what respect the diagnosis was erroneous and incorrect, what the claimed
correct diagnosis is,the point in time that the plaintiff claims the defendant(s)
should have made the correct diagnosis;

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that itcalls for

evidentiary material or information in the form of, or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
and, therefore, such demand is overly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a billof
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Otr. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), ard, 65 A.D.2d 5,53, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978). Without

waiving the above objections, itwill be claimed at trialthat this answering departed from
good and accepted standards of care in treating plaintiff Theresa Robinson in the

following respects: failing to prevent her uterine rupture during labor; negligently causing
her bladder injury; failing to perform a timely C-section on her; negligently delaying the
C-section; failing to sufficiently monitor her during her labor; failing to timely diagnose
her uterine rupture; failingto take her proper obstetrical and gynecological history; failing
nurses'
take heed of the observations and notes regarding her condition during labor;
failing to timely diagnose her bladder injury; failing to follow-up her condition during
labor; negligently attempting vaginal delivery to her despite her previous history of

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that itcalls for

evidentiary material or information in the form of, or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
and, therefore, such demand isoverly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a billof
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), ard, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978). Without

waiving the above objections, itwillbe claimed at trial that this answering departed from
good and accepted standards of care in treating plaintiffTheresa Robinson in the

following respects: failing to prevent her uterine rupture during labor; negligently causing
her bladder injury;failing to perform a timely C-section on her; asgligently delaying the
C-section; failing to sufficiently monitor her during her labor; failing to timely diagnose
her uterine rupture; failing to take her proper obstetrical and gynecological history; failing
nurses'
take heed of the observations and notes regarding her condition during labor;
failing to timely diagnose her bladder injury; failing to follow-up her condition during
labor; negligently attempting vaginal delivery to her despite her previous history of

(d) The name of each and every contraindicated drug;

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper In that itcalls for

evidentiary material or Information in the form of,or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
FILED:
.......,...... QUEENS
,--.....- COUNTY
...--., - - CLERK
.........-- .01/08/2020
, , ...., ........ 02:20
...,. .... PM
....
INDEX NO. 717964/2018
NYSCEF
NYSCEF DOC.
DOC. NO.
NO. 28
62 RECEIVED
RECEIVED NYSCEF:
NYSCEF: 07/02/2019
01/08/2020

and, therefore, such demand is overly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a billof
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), ard, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978).

(e) The name of each proper drug allegedly administered incorrectly;

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that itcalls for

evidentiary material or information in the form of, or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
and, therefore, such demand isoverly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a billof
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Cir. of Bmoklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), aFd, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978).

(f) The name of each and every test the defendant(s) failed to take or

administer; and,

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that itcalls for

evidentiary material or information in the form of, or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
and, therefore, such demand isoverly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a billof
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Cir. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), ard, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978). Without

waiving the above objections, itwillbe claimed at trial that this answering departed from
good and accepted standards of care in treating plaintiffTheresa Robinson In the

following respects: failing to prevent her uterine rupture during labor; negligently causing
her bladder injury; failingto perform a timely C-section on her; negligently delaying the
C-section; failing to sufficiently monitor her during her labor; failing to timely diagñcsa
her uterine rupture; failing to take her proper obstetrical and gyneccicgical history; failing
nurses'
take heed of the observations and notes regarding her condition during labor;
failing to timely diagnose her bladder injury; failing to follow-up her condition during
labor; negligently attempting vaginal delivery to her despite her previous history of

delivering by o-section; failing to anticipate her abdominal adhesions in lightof her past
gynecological and obstetrical history; and failing to advise her of the material risks of,
benefits of, and alternatives to the vaginal delivery and c-section.

(g) The name of each and every test the defendant(s) improperly took or
administered, and the manner in which each said test was improperly taken
or administered.

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that itcalls for

evidentiary material or information in the form of,or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
and, therefore, such demand isoverly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a billof
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Cir. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), aFd, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978). Without

waiving the above objections, itwill be claimed at trialthat this answering departed from
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 01/08/2020 02:20 PM INDEX NO. 717964/2018
NY SCEF
NYSCEF DOC.
DOC. NO
NO. . 262
8 RECEIVED
RECEIVED NYSCEF:
NYS CEF: 01/08/2020
07 /02 /2019

good and accepted standards of care in treating plaintiffTheresa Robinson in the
following respects: failing to prevent her uterine rupture during iabor; negligently causing
her bladder injury; failing to perform a timely C-section on her; negligently delaying the
C-section; failing to sufficiently monitor her during her labor; failing to timely diagnose
her uterine rupture; failing to take her proper obstetrical and gynecological history; failing
nurses'
take heed of the observations and notes regarding her condition during labor;
failing to timely diagnose her bladder injury; failing to follow-up her condition during
labor; negligently attempting vaginal delivery to her despite her previous history of

delivering by o-section; failing to anticipate her abdominal adhesions in light of her past
gynecological and obstetrical history; and failing to advise her of the material risks of,
benefits of,and altematives to the vaginal delivery and c-section.

8. Ifplaintiff(s) claims that defendant(s) improperly performed a physical examination or
performed a contraindicated procedure and/or unnecessary procedure, state:

(a) In what manner the physical examination was improperly performed;

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that itcalls for
evidentiary material or information in the form of, or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
and, therefore, such demand is overly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a billof
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), aFd, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978). Without

waiving the above objections, itwillbe claimed at trial that this answering departed from
good and accepted standards of care in treating plaintiffTheresa Robinson in the

following respects: failing to prevent her uterine rupture during labor; neg||gêñtly causing
her bladder injury; failing to perform a timely C-section on her; negligently delaying the
C-section; failing to sufficiently monitor her during her labor; failing to timely diagnose
her uterine rupture; failing to take her proper obstetrical and gynecological history; failing
nurses'
take heed of the observations and notes regarding her condition during labor;
failing to timely diagnose her bladder injury; falling to follow-up her condition during
labor; negligently attempting vaginal delivery to her despite her previous history of

(b) The name of the surgical procedure and the date performed; and,

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that itcalls for

evidentiary rñatsris| or information in the form of,or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
and, therefore, such demand is overly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a bill of
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), aFd, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978). Without

waiving the above objections, itwill be claimed at trialthat this answering departed from
good and accepted standards of care in treating plaintiffTheresa Robinson in the

following respects: falling to prevent her uterine rupture during labor; negligently causing
her bladder injury; failing to perform a timely C-section on her; negligently delaying the
C-section; failing to sufficiently monitor her during her labor; failing to timely diagnose
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 01/08/2020 02:20 PM INDEX NO. 717964/2018
NY SCEF
NYSCEF DOC
DOC. . NO.
NO. 262
8 RECEIVED
RECEIVED NYSCEF:
NYSCEF: 01/08/2020
07 /02 /2019

her uterine rupture; failing to take her proper obstetrical and gynecological history; failing
nurses'
take heed of the observations and notes regarding her condition during labor;
failing to timely diagnose her bladder injury; failing to follow-up her condition during
labor; negilgantly attempting vaginal delivery to her despite her previous history of

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that itcalls for

evidentiary material or information in the form of, or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
and, therefore, such demand isoverly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a bill of
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Cir. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), aFd, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978). Without

waiving the above objections, itwill be claimed at trial that this answering departed from
good and accepted standards of care in treating plaintiff Theresa Robinson in the

following respects: failing to prevent her uterine rupture during labor; negligently causing
her bladder injury; failing to perform a timely C-section on her; negligently delaying the
C-section; failing to sufficiently monitor her during her labor; failing to timely diagnose
her uterine rupture; failingto take her proper obstetrical and gynecological history; failing
nurses'
take heed of the observations and notes regarding her condition during labor;
failing to timely diagnose her bladder injury; failing to follow-up her condition during
labor; negligently attempting vaginal delivery to her despite her previous history of

9. State the injuries which plaintiff(s) alleges to have sustained as a resuit of the alleged
negligence and/or medical malpractice of the defendant(s).

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that itcalls for

evidentiary material or information in the form of,or to be gleaned from, expert testimony
and, therefore, such demand is overly broad, improper and beyond the scope of a bill
of
particulars. Dellaglio v. Paul, 250 A.D.2d 806,673 N.Y.S.2d 212 (2d Dep't 1998);
Heyward v. Ellenville Cmty. Hosp, 215 A.D.2d967, 627 N.Y.S.2d 167 (3d Dep't 1995);
Patterson v. Jewish Hosp. & Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn, 94 Misc. 2d 680, 405 N.Y.S.2d 194
(Sup. Ct., Kings Co.), ard, 65 A.D.2d 553, 409 N.Y.S.2d 124 (2d Dep't 1978). Without

waiving these objections, plaintiffTheresa Robinson sustained the following injuries as a
result of this answering defendant's negligent acts and omissions:

• Uterine rupture
• bladder .
Urinary injury
• Loss of chance to conceive
• incontinence
Urinary
•
Urinary urgency
• Abdominal scarring
• Loss of sexual drive
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 01/08/2020 02:20 PM INDEX NO. 717964/2018
NYSCEF
NYSCEF DOC.
DOC. NO.NO. 28
62 RECHIVED
RECEIVED NYSCEF:
NYSCEF: 07/02/2019
01/08/2020

•
Urinary frequency
• Needed uterine repair
• Needed bladder repair
urinary
• Needed catheter
indwelling urinary
• Nocturia
• Pain during sexual intercourse
• Abdominal pains
• Failure to bond with newborn
• Weigh gain
• Heavy, painful menstruation
• Postpartum depression
• Loss of enjoyment of life
• Social isolation
• Emotional distress

9a. State which of the injuries listed above are claimed to be permanent.

RESPONSE: Plaintiffs object to this demand as being improper in that itcalls for

Case Info

Judge

PETER J. O Track Judge’s New Case

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

January 08, 2020

Case Filing Date

November 22, 2018

County

Parties

ANDREWS-SANTILLO, ASHLEY Attorney for the Plaintiff
BENVENUTO, THOMAS J Attorney for the Defendants
BURKE, YANIQUE LATOYA Attorney for the Defendants
CASTILLO, ROBERT Attorney for the Defendant
Dahle, Bridget L. Attorney for the Defendant
Deepak Nanda M.D. Defendant
DEEPAK NANDA, M.D., P.C. Defendant
Derek Robinson Plaintiff
Emmanuel M. Pafos M.D. Defendant
GRAHAM, ASHLEY RENEE Attorney for the Defendants
KRAUS, STEVEN WILLIAM Attorney for the Defendant
KRAUS, STEVEN WILLIAM Attorney for the Defendants
LA PINTA, MICHAEL JAMES Attorney for the Defendant
LONG ISLAND JEWISH MEDICAL CENTER Defendant
NORTHWELL HEALTH, INC. Defendant
PAGLINAWAN, JAMES S Attorney for the Plaintiff
PAPA, LAURA M Attorney for the Defendant
SAGESSER, REGINA MARIE Attorney for the Defendant
SAGESSER, REGINA MARIE Attorney for the Defendants
SANFRATELLO, ANTHONY JOHN Attorney for the Defendants
SHAUB, HENRY ZEE Attorney for the Defendant
TENNEY, KRISTA MARIE Attorney for the Defendant
Theresa Robinson Plaintiff
TURRIZIANI, JENIFER V. Attorney for the Defendants
XANTHAKIS, ANTHONY C Attorney for the Defendant
DAWN ADELSON Attorney
MARK SALSBERG Attorneys for Defendants
MARISA AXELRAD Attorneys for Plaintiffs
LESLIE BURKE Attorneys for Defendants
JOSEPH GALVANO Attorneys for Defendants
JUAN GONZALEZ Attorney
ZEV SCHWARTZ Attorney
STEVEN WU Attorneys for Defendants
MARISA LONGO Attorneys for Plaintiffs
BRIDGET KYLE Attorneys for Defendants
STEVEN GRANVILLE Attorney

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.