Preview
(FILED HZ 1
invert WOEX MPa AR SEFSO?
NYSC DO nace GE IMERMNSEF
ARG A/2024
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Index No:
COUNTY OF ONONDAGA Date Purchased:
ween --- +--+ + + +
PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, an
incompetent, by his Guardian ad Litem, SUMMONS
NATALIA MAYELA LOTT,
The plaintiff
Plaintiff, designates Onondaga
County as the place of
-against- trial
The basis of venue is
ANUPA NADKARNI, DILPREET KAUR, the plaintiff's
RUSHIKESH SHAH, KOLA AFOLABI, VIKAS residence
SINGH, RISA FARBER, JESSICA ARMY, LISA The plaintiff resides
KAUFMANN, PAHD ALI, and ALISHA HEMRAJ, at 8210 Penelope Lane
Liverpool, New York
Defendants. 13090
-- -X COUNTY OF ONONDAGA
TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANTS:
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the complaint in this action
and to serve a copy of your answer, or, if the complaint is not served
with this Summons, to serve a notice of appearance, on the Plaintiff's
Attorney(s) within 20 days after the service of this Summons,
exclusive of the day of service (or within 30 days after the service
is complete if this Summons is not personally delivered to you within
the State of New York); and in case of your failure to appear or
answer, judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief
demanded in the complaint.
Dated: New York, NY
December 5, 2013
GAIR, 7 CONASON, STEIGMAN,
F, OOM & RI JOWITZ,
Attor! or plai, iff
B OWARD S. HERSHENHORN, ESQ.
80 Pine Street
New York, New York, 10005
(212) 943-1090
Defendants’ addresses
SEE RIDER
seo ait aoe sew sessment so a
. J a“ oe i iid ei
RIDER
ANUPA NADKARNI RISA FARBER
Upstate University Hospital Upstate University Hospital
750 Bast Adams Street 750 East Adams Street
Syracuse, New York, 13210 Syracuse, New York, 13210
DILPREET KAUR JESSICA ARMY,
9435 Lakewind Lane Upstate University Hospital
Elk Grove, CA 95758 750 East Adams Street
Syracuse, New York, 13210
RUSHIKESH SHAH
Upstate University Hospital
750 East Adams Street LISA KAUFMANN
Syracuse, New York, 13210 Upstate University Hospital
750 East Adams Street
KOLA AFOLABI Syracuse, New York, 13210
Upstate University Hospital
750 East Adams Street FAHD ALI
Syracuse, New York, 13210 Upstate University Hospital
750 East Adams Street
Syracuse, New York, 13210
VIKAS SINGH
Upstate University Hospital ALISHA HEMRAT
750 East Adams Street Upstate University Hospital
Syracuse, New York, 13210 750 East Adams Street
Syracuse, New York, 13210
o aioe oe aoe os wom
ntti i niet ss pees stg soe ae te wo es aati ea ib iia
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Index No:
COUNTY OF ONONDAGA
ween eee nee ee ee ee ee ee
PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, an
incompetent, by his Guardian ad Litem, VERIFIED COMPLAINT
NATALIA MAYELA LOTT,
Plaintiff,
~against-
ANUPA NADKARNI, DILPREET KAOR,
RUSHIKESH SHAH, KOLA AFOLABI, VIKAS
SINGH, RISA FARBER, JESSICA ARMY, LISA
KAUFMANN, FAHD ALI, and ALISHA HEMRAJ,
Defendants.
wee ene ee en ee eee
Plaintiff, complaining of the defendants, by her attorneys,
Gair, Gair, Conason, Steigman, Mackauf, Bloom & Rubinowitz,
respectfully shows to this Court and alleges, upon information
and belief, as follows:
1. Prior to the commencement of this action, and more
particularly, on the 30% day of October, 2013, the
plaintiff, NATALIA MAYELA LOTT, was duly appointed Guardian
ad Litem for PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, an incompetent, by
Order of Honorable James P. Murphy, was duly qualified as
such and is now acting in said capacity.
2. The defendant, ANUPA NADKARNI, was a physician duly licensed
to practice medicine in the State of New York.
3. The defendant, ANUPA NADKARNI, specialized in the field of
internal medicine.
wre meen mone seerengremeenerntinmnrstarritectetiret peraprangvors aot ss
The defendant, ANUPA NADKARNI, specialized in the field of
critical care medicine.
5. The defendant, DILPREET KAUR, was a physician duly licensed
to practice medicine in the State of New York.
6. The defendant, DILPREET KAUR, specialized in the field of
neurology.
7, The defendant, RUSHIKESH SHAH, was a physician duly licensed
to practice medicine in the State of New York.
The defendant, RUSHIKESH SHAH, specialized in the field of
internal medicine.
The defendant, KOLA AFOLABI, was a physician duly licensed
to practice medicine in the State of New York.
10. The defendant, KOLA AFOLABI, specialized in the field of
internal medicine.
11 The defendant, VIKAS SINGH, was a physician duly licensed to
practice medicine in the State of New York.
12 The defendant, VIKAS SINGH, specialized in the field of
internal medicine.
13 The defendant, RISA FARBER, was a physician duly licensed to
practice medicine in the State of New York.
14, The defendant, RISA FARBER, specialized in the field of
internal medicine.
15 The defendant, RISA FARBER, specialized in the field of
emergency medicine.
16. The defendant, JESSICA ARMY, was a physician duly licensed
cee! cern se oe son ~ ecscanemnegepeee —_
sin’ vaceiitintc aii
to practice medicine in the State of New York.
17. The defendant, JESSICA ARMY, specialized in the field of
internal medicine.
18 The defendant, JESSICA ARMY, specialized in the field of
emergency medicine.
19 The defendant, LISA KAUFMANN, was a physician duly licensed
to practice medicine in the State of New York.
20 The defendant, LISA KAUFMANN, specialized in the field of
internal medicine.
21 The defendant, FAHD ALI, was a physician duly licensed to
practice medicine in the State of New York.
22 The defendant, FAHD ALI, specialized in the field of
emergency medicine.
23 The defendant, ALISHA HEMRAJ, was a physician duly licensed
to practice medicine in the State of New York
24, The defendant, ALISHA HEMRAJ, specialized in the field of
internal medicine.
25. In August 2013, the plaintiff’s incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE
UMANA FONSECA, was a patient at Upstate University Hospital,
750 Adams Street, Syracuse, New York, 13210.
26 In August 2013, the defendant ANUPA NADKARNI, undertook to
and did render certain medical, eritical care, and
diagnostic care and treatment to the plaintiff’s
incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA.
27 In August 2013, the defendant, DILPREET KAUR, undertook to
rreinseecgeenceret ess ss ae
se git feline
and did render certain medical, neurological, and diagnostic
care and treatment to the plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO
ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA.
28 In August 2013, the defendant, RUSHIKESH SHAH, undertook to
and did render certain medical and diagnostic care and
treatment to the plaintiff’s incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE
UMANA FONSECA.
29 In August 2013, the defendant, KOLA AFOLABI, undertook to
and did render certain medical and diagnostic care and
treatment to the plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE
UMANA FONSECA.
30. In August 2013, the defendant, VIKAS SINGH, undertook to and
did render certain medical and diagnostic care and treatment
to the plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA.
31 In August 2013, the defendant, RISA FARBER, undertook to and
did render certain medical, emergency medicine, and
diagnostic care and treatment to the plaintiff’s
incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA.
32. In August 2013, the defendant, JESSICA ARMY, undertook to
and did render certain medical, emergency medicine, and
diagnostic care and treatment to the plaintiff's
incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA.
33 In August 2013, the defendant, LISA KAUFMANN, undertook to
and did render certain medical and diagnostic care and
treatment to the plaintiff’s incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE
ee ~ a ~
~
UMANA FONSECA.
34. In August 2013, the defendant, FAHD ALI, undertook to and
did render certain medical, emergency medicine, and
diagnostic care and treatment to the plaintiff's
incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA.
35. In August 2013, the defendant, ALISHA HEMRAJ, undertook to
and did render certain medical and diagnostic care and
treatment to the plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE
UMANA FONSECA.
36. The defendants, their agents, servants, and employees were
careless and negligent in the aforesaid medical, critical
care, neurological, emergency medicine, and diagnostic care j
and treatment rendered to the plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO
ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, and departed from standard and
accepted medical, critical care, neurological, emergency
medicine, and diagnostic practices and procedures in:
improperly and inappropriately performing a central venous
catheterization procedure on the patient; placing the
central venous catheter into the patient’s right femoral
artery; directly cannulating the patient’s artery with a
catheter and leaving him in that condition for a long period
of time; and critically delaying the proper and appropriate
diagnosis and removal of the improperly inserted central
venous catheter.
37. By reason of the foregoing, the plaintiff's incompetent,
ee conn ——— es a oe
inna cist so site saci cc we
PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA’s, right leg became and remained
ischemic and gangrenous, ultimately resulting in an above
the knee amputation of his right leg.
38 By the reason of the foregoing, the plaintiff’s incompetent,
PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, has been caused to suffer
severe physical injuries, pain and mental anguish, and has
been caused to incur certain medical and other expenses.
39 The amount of damages sought exceeds the jurisdictional
limits of all lower courts which would otherwise have
jurisdiction.
40. It is hereby alleged that pursuant to CPLR §1603 that this
action is exempt from the operation of CPLR §1601 by reason
of one or more of the exemptions provided in CPLR §1602,
specifically §1602 (7).
AS AND FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
41 The plaintiff repeats, reiterate and re-alleges each and
every allegation contained in those paragraphs of this
complaint marked and designated “1" through “40" inclusive
with the same force and effect as if hereinafter set forth
more fully at length.
42 That there were certain risks hazards and dangers with
respect to the course of treatment, surgery and procedure
undertaken by defendants herein.
43 That the defendants, their agents, servants and employees
failed to warn and advise the plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO
need se m ee cee seco
iene dct a ea nonce ie cama ti sap ni
ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, and his family of the risks, hazards
and dangers of the aforesaid course of treatment, surgery
and procedure, ox lack thereof, and available alternatives
to it.
44. The plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, and
his family had the right to know of the risks, hazards and
dangers of the aforesaid course of treatment, surgery and
procedure, or lack thereof, and available alternatives to
it.
45. Had the plaintiff’s incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA,
and his family, or any reasonable person, been informed of
the risks, hazards and dangers with respect to the aforesaid
course of treatment, surgery and procedure, or lack thereof,
he would not have consented to it.
46 That by reason of the foregoing, plaintiff's incompetent,
PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, has been caused to suffer
severe physical injuries, pain and mental anguish and has
been caused to incur certain medical and other expenses.
47 That the amount of damages sought exceeds the jurisdictional
limits of all lower courts which would otherwise have
jurisdiction.
48. It is hereby alleged that pursuant to CPLR §1603 that this
action is exempt from the operation of CPLR §1601 by reason
of one or more of the exemptions provided in CPLR §1602,
specifically §1602(7).
coer mosis ale ne sais scopes tet soe ~~ ~~ oe eames
a aye s siti sti
WHEREFORE, the plaintiff demands judgment
against the defendants in the First and Second Causes of Action,
together with interest, costs and disbursements of this action.
Dated: New York, New York
December 5, 2013
GAIR, AL SON EIGMAN, MACKAUF
BLGOM & BIN
CE €
By
HOWARD S. HERSHENHORN, ESQ.
Attorneys for the Plaintiff
Office and Post Office Address
80 Pine Street, 34 Floor
New York, New York 10005-1702
212.943.1090
pent seiner osepspgninjenoennenenee oo
‘icant i inte inne a sla siti Siero eviiahi en
TTORNEY’S VERIFICATION
STATE OF NEW YORK )
) SS.
COUNTY OF NEW YORK )
HOWARD S. HERSHENHORN, the undersigned, an attorney
admitted to practice in the Courts of New York State, states that
he is a member of the firm of Gair, Gair, Conason, Steigman,
Mackauf, Bloom & Rubinowitz, attorneys for plaintiff in the
within action; that deponent has read the foregoing COMPLAINT and
knows its contents thereof that the same is true to deponent’s
own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be
alleged upon information and belief, and that as to those
matters, deponent believes them to be true. Deponent further
states that the reason this verification is made by your deponent
| and not by the plaintiff is that the plaintiff is not currently
within the county wherein deponent maintains his office.
The grounds of deponent’s belief as to all matters not
stated upon deponent’s own knowledge are consultations had with
the plaintiff and investigation and data in deponent’s
possession.
The undersigned affirms that the foregoing statements are
Lob
true under the penalties of perjury.
HOWARD S. HERSHENHORN, ESQ.
seerencteenernsint “ os rc
INDEX NO. 2013EF361
(FILED: ONONDAGA COUNTY CLERK 12/06/2013) -
“NYSCEF DOC. "NO
=o —— RECEIVED NYSCEF:~12/06/2013)
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Index No:
COUNTY OF ONONDAGA
----+-+----------
+--+ +--+ +--+ +--+ -
PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, an
incompetent, by his Guardian ad Litem, CERTIFICATE OF
NATALIA MAYELA LOTT,
MERIT
Plaintiff,
-against-
ANUPA NADKARNI, DILPREET KAUR,
RUSHIKESH SHAH, KOLA AFOLABI, VIKAS
SINGH, RISA FARBER, JESSICA ARMY, LISA
KAUFMANN, FAHD ALI, and ALISHA HEMRAJ,
Defendants.
a+ -X
We have reviewed the facts of this case and have consulted
with at least one physician who is licensed to practice medicine
in the United States and who we reasonably believe is
knowledgeable in the relevant issues involved in this action, and
we have concluded on the basis of such review and consultation
that there is a reasonable basis for the commencement of this
action.
Dated: New York, New York
December 5, 2013
GAIR, GAIR, CONASON, STEIGMAN
MACKAUF, M & RUBINOWITZ
HOWARD S. HERSHENHORN, ESQ.
Office & P.O. Address
80 Pine Street
New York, New York 10005
(212) 943-1090
e ,
ONONDAGA COUNTY CLERK 0 INDEX NO. 2013HF361
FILED:
wescey Doc. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/07/2p14
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF ONONDAGA
PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, an
Incompetent, by his Guardian ad Litem, NATALIA
MAYELA LOTT,
Plaintiff, VERIFIED ANSWER
vs. INDEX NO.: 361/2013 EF
ANUPA NADKARNI, DILPREET KAUR,
RUSHIKESH SHAH, KOLA AFOLABI, VIKAS
SINGH, RISA FARBER, JESSICA ARMY, LISA
KAUFMANN, FAHD ALI, and ALISHA HEMRAJ,
Defendants.
The defendant, ‘Anupa Nadkarni, M_D., by Sugarman Law Firm, LLP, answering the
Verified Complaint of the plaintiff, alleges:
1 ADMITS the allegations contained in paragraphs “2” and “4”.
2. DENIES knowledge and information sufficientto form a belief as to the
allegations contained in paragraphs “1”, “5”, “6”, “7”, “8”, “9”, “10”, “11”, “12”, “13”, “14”,
15”, #16", “17”, “18”, “19”, “20”, “21”, “22”, “23”, and “24”,
3 DENIES the allegations contained in paragraphs “3”, “36”, “37”, “38”, “39”,
“43”, “46”, and “47”.
4, DENIES the allegations contained in paragraphs “25”, “26”, “27”, “28”, “29”,
30”, “31”, “32”, “33”, “34”, and “35” except admit certain professional services were rendered ,
to plaintiff's incompetent at Upstate University Hospital and refer to the medical records for the
specifics thereof.
Sugarman Law Fiem,LLP + 211 West Jefferson Street + Syracuse, NY 13202-2680
5 DENIES the allegations contained in paragraphs “40”, “42”, “44”, “45”, and “48”
and refer all questions of law to the court.
6. With respect to paragraph “41” defendants repeat, reiterate, and reallege each and
every admission and denial heretofore made with the same force and effects as if more fully set
forth herein.
7 DENIES each and every other allegation not hereinbefore specifically admitted,
controverted or denied.
AS AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES:
8 That the plaintiffs incompetent assumed risks which caused or contributed to
plaintiff incompetent’s injuries.
AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES:
9. That whatever injuries the plaintiff's incompetent sustained were caused or were
contributed to by the culpable conduct of the plaintiff's incompetent.
AS AND FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES:
10. That the accident and injuries complained of in the plaintiff's complaint were
caused or brought about by the negligence of a third person or persons over whom the defendant
herein had no control and for whose acts this defendant is in no way responsible.
AS AND FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES:
lL. In the event plaintiff has judgment against the defendant, the defendant is entitled
to set-off or reduction of any damage award, liability for which is expressly denied, for amounts
Sugarman Law Firm, LLP * 211 West Jefferson Strect + Sycacuse,
NY 13202-2680
received from anycollateral sources as defined by CPLR §4545, including but not limited to,
insurance, Social Security, Workers! Compensation, or employee benefit programs.
AS AND FOR A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES:
12, That the cause of action in the complaint is barred by the applicable statute of
limitations.
AS AND FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES:
13. ‘That the court has no jurisdiction of the person of the defendant.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES:
14, That the complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief may be
properly granted.
AS AND FOR A EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES:
15. That the defendant's liability is limited according to Article 16 of the CPLR.
AS AND FOR A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES:
16. The answering defendant complied with the standards conceming informed
consent set forth in §2805-d of the Public Health Law. Further, that the Jack of informed
consent, if any, was not a proximate cause of the injury or condition for which recovery is
sought.
AS AND FOR A TENTH AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES:
17. That the defendant’s relative culpability of each party who is or may be liable for
the damages alleged by plaintiff's incompetent in this action-should
be determined in accordance
:
Sugarmao Law Fiem,LLP = 211 West Jefferson Street + Syracuse,
NY 13202-2680
with the decisional and statutory law of the State of New York, and the equitable share of each
party’s liability for contribution should be determined and apportioned in accordance with the
telative culpability, if any, of each such party pursuant to Article 14 of the CPLR.
WHEREFORE, defendant demands judgment dismissing the complaint together with the
costs and disbursements of this action.
Dated: January 6,2014
Danielle Mikalajunas Fogel,\Esq.\
SUGARMAN Law Fir,
Attomeys for Anupa Nadkarni,
Office and Post Office Address
211 West Jefferson Street
Syracuse, New York 13202
Telephone: (315) 474-2943
TO:
Howard S. Hershenhorn, Esq,
Gair, GAIR, CONASON, STEIGMAN, MACKAUF, BLOOM & RUBINOWITZ,
Attorneys for Pablo Enrique Umana Fonseca, an incompetent, by his Guardian ad Litem,
Natalia Mayela Lott
Office and Post Office Address
80 Pine Street, 34th Floor
New York, New York 10005
Telephone: (212) 943-1090
‘Sugarman
Law Firm, LLP + 211 West Jefferson Street * Syracuse,
NY 13202-2680
as 4baaaas FIRMG FAG weree
aa
Bt
‘|
NEW YORK ss:
Gi f OF ONONDAGA )
E
upa Nadkeri, M.D., being duly sworn, deposes and says that deponent is one of the
ints in the within action; that deponent has read the foregoing Verified Answer and knows
thereof, that the same is trug to deponent's
own knowledge, except
ea to the marters
dto be alleged upon information and belief, and as to those matters deponent belisves
pitted
te true.
i
Rrwe-PNerrnnre
Anupa Nadkarni, M.D, |
‘before
me this
dayiof January, 2014,
1a
niad
jolic-
al
State
of New York
So,
No. O1SO6t
Expires May 20, 20,
20: “ 8
an
bay
it
al Sugseman Law Firm, LLP » 211 West Jefferson Street © Syracuse, NY 15202-2580
q
STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT
ONONDAGA COUNTY
PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, an
Incompetent, by his Guardian Ad Litem,
NATALIA MAYELA LOTT,
Plaintiff,
VERIFIED ANSWER
Vv.
Index No. 361/2013 EF
ANUPA NADKARNI, DILPREET KAUR,
RUSHIKESH SHAH, KOLA AFOLABI, VIKAS
SINGH, RISA FARBER, JESSICA ARMY, LISA
KAUFMANN, FAHD ALI, and ALISHA HEMRAJ,
Defendants,
Defendants, Dilpreet Kaur, Rushikesh Shah, Kola Afolabi, Vikas Singh, Jessica Army,
Fahd Ali and Alisha Hemraj, by their attorney, ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, Attorney
General of the State of New York, JOSEPH’D. CALLERY; of Counsel, answering the
Verified Complaint in the above entitled proceeding allege as follows:
1 DENIES KNOWLEDGE OR INFO
Preview
(FILED HZ 1 invert WOEX MPa AR SEFSO? NYSC DO nace GE IMERMNSEF ARG A/2024 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Index No: COUNTY OF ONONDAGA Date Purchased: ween --- +--+ + + + PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, an incompetent, by his Guardian ad Litem, SUMMONS NATALIA MAYELA LOTT, The plaintiff Plaintiff, designates Onondaga County as the place of -against- trial The basis of venue is ANUPA NADKARNI, DILPREET KAUR, the plaintiff's RUSHIKESH SHAH, KOLA AFOLABI, VIKAS residence SINGH, RISA FARBER, JESSICA ARMY, LISA The plaintiff resides KAUFMANN, PAHD ALI, and ALISHA HEMRAJ, at 8210 Penelope Lane Liverpool, New York Defendants. 13090 -- -X COUNTY OF ONONDAGA TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANTS: YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the complaint in this action and to serve a copy of your answer, or, if the complaint is not served with this Summons, to serve a notice of appearance, on the Plaintiff's Attorney(s) within 20 days after the service of this Summons, exclusive of the day of service (or within 30 days after the service is complete if this Summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New York); and in case of your failure to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint. Dated: New York, NY December 5, 2013 GAIR, 7 CONASON, STEIGMAN, F, OOM & RI JOWITZ, Attor! or plai, iff B OWARD S. HERSHENHORN, ESQ. 80 Pine Street New York, New York, 10005 (212) 943-1090 Defendants’ addresses SEE RIDER seo ait aoe sew sessment so a . J a“ oe i iid ei RIDER ANUPA NADKARNI RISA FARBER Upstate University Hospital Upstate University Hospital 750 Bast Adams Street 750 East Adams Street Syracuse, New York, 13210 Syracuse, New York, 13210 DILPREET KAUR JESSICA ARMY, 9435 Lakewind Lane Upstate University Hospital Elk Grove, CA 95758 750 East Adams Street Syracuse, New York, 13210 RUSHIKESH SHAH Upstate University Hospital 750 East Adams Street LISA KAUFMANN Syracuse, New York, 13210 Upstate University Hospital 750 East Adams Street KOLA AFOLABI Syracuse, New York, 13210 Upstate University Hospital 750 East Adams Street FAHD ALI Syracuse, New York, 13210 Upstate University Hospital 750 East Adams Street Syracuse, New York, 13210 VIKAS SINGH Upstate University Hospital ALISHA HEMRAT 750 East Adams Street Upstate University Hospital Syracuse, New York, 13210 750 East Adams Street Syracuse, New York, 13210 o aioe oe aoe os wom ntti i niet ss pees stg soe ae te wo es aati ea ib iia SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Index No: COUNTY OF ONONDAGA ween eee nee ee ee ee ee ee PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, an incompetent, by his Guardian ad Litem, VERIFIED COMPLAINT NATALIA MAYELA LOTT, Plaintiff, ~against- ANUPA NADKARNI, DILPREET KAOR, RUSHIKESH SHAH, KOLA AFOLABI, VIKAS SINGH, RISA FARBER, JESSICA ARMY, LISA KAUFMANN, FAHD ALI, and ALISHA HEMRAJ, Defendants. wee ene ee en ee eee Plaintiff, complaining of the defendants, by her attorneys, Gair, Gair, Conason, Steigman, Mackauf, Bloom & Rubinowitz, respectfully shows to this Court and alleges, upon information and belief, as follows: 1. Prior to the commencement of this action, and more particularly, on the 30% day of October, 2013, the plaintiff, NATALIA MAYELA LOTT, was duly appointed Guardian ad Litem for PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, an incompetent, by Order of Honorable James P. Murphy, was duly qualified as such and is now acting in said capacity. 2. The defendant, ANUPA NADKARNI, was a physician duly licensed to practice medicine in the State of New York. 3. The defendant, ANUPA NADKARNI, specialized in the field of internal medicine. wre meen mone seerengremeenerntinmnrstarritectetiret peraprangvors aot ss The defendant, ANUPA NADKARNI, specialized in the field of critical care medicine. 5. The defendant, DILPREET KAUR, was a physician duly licensed to practice medicine in the State of New York. 6. The defendant, DILPREET KAUR, specialized in the field of neurology. 7, The defendant, RUSHIKESH SHAH, was a physician duly licensed to practice medicine in the State of New York. The defendant, RUSHIKESH SHAH, specialized in the field of internal medicine. The defendant, KOLA AFOLABI, was a physician duly licensed to practice medicine in the State of New York. 10. The defendant, KOLA AFOLABI, specialized in the field of internal medicine. 11 The defendant, VIKAS SINGH, was a physician duly licensed to practice medicine in the State of New York. 12 The defendant, VIKAS SINGH, specialized in the field of internal medicine. 13 The defendant, RISA FARBER, was a physician duly licensed to practice medicine in the State of New York. 14, The defendant, RISA FARBER, specialized in the field of internal medicine. 15 The defendant, RISA FARBER, specialized in the field of emergency medicine. 16. The defendant, JESSICA ARMY, was a physician duly licensed cee! cern se oe son ~ ecscanemnegepeee —_ sin’ vaceiitintc aii to practice medicine in the State of New York. 17. The defendant, JESSICA ARMY, specialized in the field of internal medicine. 18 The defendant, JESSICA ARMY, specialized in the field of emergency medicine. 19 The defendant, LISA KAUFMANN, was a physician duly licensed to practice medicine in the State of New York. 20 The defendant, LISA KAUFMANN, specialized in the field of internal medicine. 21 The defendant, FAHD ALI, was a physician duly licensed to practice medicine in the State of New York. 22 The defendant, FAHD ALI, specialized in the field of emergency medicine. 23 The defendant, ALISHA HEMRAJ, was a physician duly licensed to practice medicine in the State of New York 24, The defendant, ALISHA HEMRAJ, specialized in the field of internal medicine. 25. In August 2013, the plaintiff’s incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, was a patient at Upstate University Hospital, 750 Adams Street, Syracuse, New York, 13210. 26 In August 2013, the defendant ANUPA NADKARNI, undertook to and did render certain medical, eritical care, and diagnostic care and treatment to the plaintiff’s incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA. 27 In August 2013, the defendant, DILPREET KAUR, undertook to rreinseecgeenceret ess ss ae se git feline and did render certain medical, neurological, and diagnostic care and treatment to the plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA. 28 In August 2013, the defendant, RUSHIKESH SHAH, undertook to and did render certain medical and diagnostic care and treatment to the plaintiff’s incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA. 29 In August 2013, the defendant, KOLA AFOLABI, undertook to and did render certain medical and diagnostic care and treatment to the plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA. 30. In August 2013, the defendant, VIKAS SINGH, undertook to and did render certain medical and diagnostic care and treatment to the plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA. 31 In August 2013, the defendant, RISA FARBER, undertook to and did render certain medical, emergency medicine, and diagnostic care and treatment to the plaintiff’s incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA. 32. In August 2013, the defendant, JESSICA ARMY, undertook to and did render certain medical, emergency medicine, and diagnostic care and treatment to the plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA. 33 In August 2013, the defendant, LISA KAUFMANN, undertook to and did render certain medical and diagnostic care and treatment to the plaintiff’s incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE ee ~ a ~ ~ UMANA FONSECA. 34. In August 2013, the defendant, FAHD ALI, undertook to and did render certain medical, emergency medicine, and diagnostic care and treatment to the plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA. 35. In August 2013, the defendant, ALISHA HEMRAJ, undertook to and did render certain medical and diagnostic care and treatment to the plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA. 36. The defendants, their agents, servants, and employees were careless and negligent in the aforesaid medical, critical care, neurological, emergency medicine, and diagnostic care j and treatment rendered to the plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, and departed from standard and accepted medical, critical care, neurological, emergency medicine, and diagnostic practices and procedures in: improperly and inappropriately performing a central venous catheterization procedure on the patient; placing the central venous catheter into the patient’s right femoral artery; directly cannulating the patient’s artery with a catheter and leaving him in that condition for a long period of time; and critically delaying the proper and appropriate diagnosis and removal of the improperly inserted central venous catheter. 37. By reason of the foregoing, the plaintiff's incompetent, ee conn ——— es a oe inna cist so site saci cc we PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA’s, right leg became and remained ischemic and gangrenous, ultimately resulting in an above the knee amputation of his right leg. 38 By the reason of the foregoing, the plaintiff’s incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, has been caused to suffer severe physical injuries, pain and mental anguish, and has been caused to incur certain medical and other expenses. 39 The amount of damages sought exceeds the jurisdictional limits of all lower courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction. 40. It is hereby alleged that pursuant to CPLR §1603 that this action is exempt from the operation of CPLR §1601 by reason of one or more of the exemptions provided in CPLR §1602, specifically §1602 (7). AS AND FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 41 The plaintiff repeats, reiterate and re-alleges each and every allegation contained in those paragraphs of this complaint marked and designated “1" through “40" inclusive with the same force and effect as if hereinafter set forth more fully at length. 42 That there were certain risks hazards and dangers with respect to the course of treatment, surgery and procedure undertaken by defendants herein. 43 That the defendants, their agents, servants and employees failed to warn and advise the plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO need se m ee cee seco iene dct a ea nonce ie cama ti sap ni ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, and his family of the risks, hazards and dangers of the aforesaid course of treatment, surgery and procedure, ox lack thereof, and available alternatives to it. 44. The plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, and his family had the right to know of the risks, hazards and dangers of the aforesaid course of treatment, surgery and procedure, or lack thereof, and available alternatives to it. 45. Had the plaintiff’s incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, and his family, or any reasonable person, been informed of the risks, hazards and dangers with respect to the aforesaid course of treatment, surgery and procedure, or lack thereof, he would not have consented to it. 46 That by reason of the foregoing, plaintiff's incompetent, PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, has been caused to suffer severe physical injuries, pain and mental anguish and has been caused to incur certain medical and other expenses. 47 That the amount of damages sought exceeds the jurisdictional limits of all lower courts which would otherwise have jurisdiction. 48. It is hereby alleged that pursuant to CPLR §1603 that this action is exempt from the operation of CPLR §1601 by reason of one or more of the exemptions provided in CPLR §1602, specifically §1602(7). coer mosis ale ne sais scopes tet soe ~~ ~~ oe eames a aye s siti sti WHEREFORE, the plaintiff demands judgment against the defendants in the First and Second Causes of Action, together with interest, costs and disbursements of this action. Dated: New York, New York December 5, 2013 GAIR, AL SON EIGMAN, MACKAUF BLGOM & BIN CE € By HOWARD S. HERSHENHORN, ESQ. Attorneys for the Plaintiff Office and Post Office Address 80 Pine Street, 34 Floor New York, New York 10005-1702 212.943.1090 pent seiner osepspgninjenoennenenee oo ‘icant i inte inne a sla siti Siero eviiahi en TTORNEY’S VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) SS. COUNTY OF NEW YORK ) HOWARD S. HERSHENHORN, the undersigned, an attorney admitted to practice in the Courts of New York State, states that he is a member of the firm of Gair, Gair, Conason, Steigman, Mackauf, Bloom & Rubinowitz, attorneys for plaintiff in the within action; that deponent has read the foregoing COMPLAINT and knows its contents thereof that the same is true to deponent’s own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief, and that as to those matters, deponent believes them to be true. Deponent further states that the reason this verification is made by your deponent | and not by the plaintiff is that the plaintiff is not currently within the county wherein deponent maintains his office. The grounds of deponent’s belief as to all matters not stated upon deponent’s own knowledge are consultations had with the plaintiff and investigation and data in deponent’s possession. The undersigned affirms that the foregoing statements are Lob true under the penalties of perjury. HOWARD S. HERSHENHORN, ESQ. seerencteenernsint “ os rc INDEX NO. 2013EF361 (FILED: ONONDAGA COUNTY CLERK 12/06/2013) - “NYSCEF DOC. "NO =o —— RECEIVED NYSCEF:~12/06/2013) SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Index No: COUNTY OF ONONDAGA ----+-+---------- +--+ +--+ +--+ +--+ - PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, an incompetent, by his Guardian ad Litem, CERTIFICATE OF NATALIA MAYELA LOTT, MERIT Plaintiff, -against- ANUPA NADKARNI, DILPREET KAUR, RUSHIKESH SHAH, KOLA AFOLABI, VIKAS SINGH, RISA FARBER, JESSICA ARMY, LISA KAUFMANN, FAHD ALI, and ALISHA HEMRAJ, Defendants. a+ -X We have reviewed the facts of this case and have consulted with at least one physician who is licensed to practice medicine in the United States and who we reasonably believe is knowledgeable in the relevant issues involved in this action, and we have concluded on the basis of such review and consultation that there is a reasonable basis for the commencement of this action. Dated: New York, New York December 5, 2013 GAIR, GAIR, CONASON, STEIGMAN MACKAUF, M & RUBINOWITZ HOWARD S. HERSHENHORN, ESQ. Office & P.O. Address 80 Pine Street New York, New York 10005 (212) 943-1090 e , ONONDAGA COUNTY CLERK 0 INDEX NO. 2013HF361 FILED: wescey Doc. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/07/2p14 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF ONONDAGA PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, an Incompetent, by his Guardian ad Litem, NATALIA MAYELA LOTT, Plaintiff, VERIFIED ANSWER vs. INDEX NO.: 361/2013 EF ANUPA NADKARNI, DILPREET KAUR, RUSHIKESH SHAH, KOLA AFOLABI, VIKAS SINGH, RISA FARBER, JESSICA ARMY, LISA KAUFMANN, FAHD ALI, and ALISHA HEMRAJ, Defendants. The defendant, ‘Anupa Nadkarni, M_D., by Sugarman Law Firm, LLP, answering the Verified Complaint of the plaintiff, alleges: 1 ADMITS the allegations contained in paragraphs “2” and “4”. 2. DENIES knowledge and information sufficientto form a belief as to the allegations contained in paragraphs “1”, “5”, “6”, “7”, “8”, “9”, “10”, “11”, “12”, “13”, “14”, 15”, #16", “17”, “18”, “19”, “20”, “21”, “22”, “23”, and “24”, 3 DENIES the allegations contained in paragraphs “3”, “36”, “37”, “38”, “39”, “43”, “46”, and “47”. 4, DENIES the allegations contained in paragraphs “25”, “26”, “27”, “28”, “29”, 30”, “31”, “32”, “33”, “34”, and “35” except admit certain professional services were rendered , to plaintiff's incompetent at Upstate University Hospital and refer to the medical records for the specifics thereof. Sugarman Law Fiem,LLP + 211 West Jefferson Street + Syracuse, NY 13202-2680 5 DENIES the allegations contained in paragraphs “40”, “42”, “44”, “45”, and “48” and refer all questions of law to the court. 6. With respect to paragraph “41” defendants repeat, reiterate, and reallege each and every admission and denial heretofore made with the same force and effects as if more fully set forth herein. 7 DENIES each and every other allegation not hereinbefore specifically admitted, controverted or denied. AS AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES: 8 That the plaintiffs incompetent assumed risks which caused or contributed to plaintiff incompetent’s injuries. AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES: 9. That whatever injuries the plaintiff's incompetent sustained were caused or were contributed to by the culpable conduct of the plaintiff's incompetent. AS AND FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES: 10. That the accident and injuries complained of in the plaintiff's complaint were caused or brought about by the negligence of a third person or persons over whom the defendant herein had no control and for whose acts this defendant is in no way responsible. AS AND FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES: lL. In the event plaintiff has judgment against the defendant, the defendant is entitled to set-off or reduction of any damage award, liability for which is expressly denied, for amounts Sugarman Law Firm, LLP * 211 West Jefferson Strect + Sycacuse, NY 13202-2680 received from anycollateral sources as defined by CPLR §4545, including but not limited to, insurance, Social Security, Workers! Compensation, or employee benefit programs. AS AND FOR A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES: 12, That the cause of action in the complaint is barred by the applicable statute of limitations. AS AND FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES: 13. ‘That the court has no jurisdiction of the person of the defendant. AS AND FOR A SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES: 14, That the complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief may be properly granted. AS AND FOR A EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES: 15. That the defendant's liability is limited according to Article 16 of the CPLR. AS AND FOR A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES: 16. The answering defendant complied with the standards conceming informed consent set forth in §2805-d of the Public Health Law. Further, that the Jack of informed consent, if any, was not a proximate cause of the injury or condition for which recovery is sought. AS AND FOR A TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THE DEFENDANT ALLEGES: 17. That the defendant’s relative culpability of each party who is or may be liable for the damages alleged by plaintiff's incompetent in this action-should be determined in accordance : Sugarmao Law Fiem,LLP = 211 West Jefferson Street + Syracuse, NY 13202-2680 with the decisional and statutory law of the State of New York, and the equitable share of each party’s liability for contribution should be determined and apportioned in accordance with the telative culpability, if any, of each such party pursuant to Article 14 of the CPLR. WHEREFORE, defendant demands judgment dismissing the complaint together with the costs and disbursements of this action. Dated: January 6,2014 Danielle Mikalajunas Fogel,\Esq.\ SUGARMAN Law Fir, Attomeys for Anupa Nadkarni, Office and Post Office Address 211 West Jefferson Street Syracuse, New York 13202 Telephone: (315) 474-2943 TO: Howard S. Hershenhorn, Esq, Gair, GAIR, CONASON, STEIGMAN, MACKAUF, BLOOM & RUBINOWITZ, Attorneys for Pablo Enrique Umana Fonseca, an incompetent, by his Guardian ad Litem, Natalia Mayela Lott Office and Post Office Address 80 Pine Street, 34th Floor New York, New York 10005 Telephone: (212) 943-1090 ‘Sugarman Law Firm, LLP + 211 West Jefferson Street * Syracuse, NY 13202-2680 as 4baaaas FIRMG FAG weree aa Bt ‘| NEW YORK ss: Gi f OF ONONDAGA ) E upa Nadkeri, M.D., being duly sworn, deposes and says that deponent is one of the ints in the within action; that deponent has read the foregoing Verified Answer and knows thereof, that the same is trug to deponent's own knowledge, except ea to the marters dto be alleged upon information and belief, and as to those matters deponent belisves pitted te true. i Rrwe-PNerrnnre Anupa Nadkarni, M.D, | ‘before me this dayiof January, 2014, 1a niad jolic- al State of New York So, No. O1SO6t Expires May 20, 20, 20: “ 8 an bay it al Sugseman Law Firm, LLP » 211 West Jefferson Street © Syracuse, NY 15202-2580 q STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT ONONDAGA COUNTY PABLO ENRIQUE UMANA FONSECA, an Incompetent, by his Guardian Ad Litem, NATALIA MAYELA LOTT, Plaintiff, VERIFIED ANSWER Vv. Index No. 361/2013 EF ANUPA NADKARNI, DILPREET KAUR, RUSHIKESH SHAH, KOLA AFOLABI, VIKAS SINGH, RISA FARBER, JESSICA ARMY, LISA KAUFMANN, FAHD ALI, and ALISHA HEMRAJ, Defendants, Defendants, Dilpreet Kaur, Rushikesh Shah, Kola Afolabi, Vikas Singh, Jessica Army, Fahd Ali and Alisha Hemraj, by their attorney, ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, Attorney General of the State of New York, JOSEPH’D. CALLERY; of Counsel, answering the Verified Complaint in the above entitled proceeding allege as follows: 1 DENIES KNOWLEDGE OR INFO