Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Diaz v. New York Downtown Hospital

784 N.E.2d 68 (2002)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 33,800+ case briefs...

Diaz v. New York Downtown Hospital

New York Court of Appeals

784 N.E.2d 68 (2002)

Facts

Eva Diaz (plaintiff) underwent a transvaginal sonogram at New York Downtown Hospital (the hospital) (defendant). While undergoing the procedure, Diaz was sexually assaulted by a male technician with whom she was left alone. Diaz sued the hospital in a New York trial court on multiple claims, including a negligent-supervision claim. The hospital moved for summary judgment on the ground that it could not be held liable for negligence because it had no prior knowledge that the male technician had a propensity to commit acts of sexual assault. In response, Diaz introduced as an expert witness a board-certified radiologist. The radiologist testified that national radiological organizations had promulgated clinical-practice guidelines recommending that another woman be present during a vaginal sonogram for the patient’s safety. The radiologist further testified that the hospital had deviated from the standard of care by not adopting a policy to execute the recommendation. However, the radiologist did not testify as to whether the guidelines had been adopted and practiced in other hospital settings or how she concluded that adopting such a policy was the accepted standard of care. The trial court entered summary judgment in the hospital’s favor on all of Diaz’s claims except for the negligent-supervision claim. For the negligent-supervision claim, the trial court held that Diaz, by presenting the expert testimony, had created a genuine issue of fact as to whether the hospital had deviated from the accepted standard of care. The hospital appealed. The appellate division determined that Diaz and her expert had not demonstrated that the recommended clinical-practice guidelines were an accepted industry practice or standard from which the hospital had deviated. Diaz appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 604,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 604,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,800 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 604,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 33,800 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership