Senior Trial Partners, Thomas A. Mobilia and Yuko A. Nakahara, and Associates, Stephen C. Lanzone and Richard M. Ceglio, successfully secured summary judgment in a case in which the plaintiffs alleged that the defendants mismanaged shoulder dystocia during the delivery of the infant-plaintiff, causing a clavicular fracture and possible brachial plexus injury. MCB represented the nurse midwife and Ob/Gyn resident involved in the delivery, as well as the hospital.
MCB moved on behalf of all it clients, submitting an expert’s affirmation, detailing how defendants appropriately, in accordance with standards of care, managed the delivery and utilized all appropriate positions and maneuvers to timely deliver the infant when shoulder dystocia as encountered. The defense expert further opined the infant's claimed injuries were proximately caused by the natural forces of labor, especially in the setting of a rapid descent, and not by the medical care rendered by MCB’s clients, which was at all times appropriate.
The Court found that defendants made a prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment. Although plaintiffs submitted an expert’s affirmation in opposition, the Court accepted our arguments that plaintiffs’ expert’s opinion on both liability and causation was impermissibly speculative and conclusory. The plaintiffs also attempted to raise new theories of liability for the first time in their expert’s affirmation in opposition to summary judgment. In reply, we cited the long line of cases deeming such conduct impermissible. The Court agreed and granted our motion in its entirety.