Plummer v. New York City Health and Hosp. Corp.
No. 2825 (N.Y. App. Div. July 12, 2001)

A woman sued a hospital corporation for failing to provide her proper prenatal and labor care and treatment, resulting in several major health problems for her child, including Erb's palsy. The suit was filed in 1991, when the child was seven years old. The hospital moved for summary judgment claiming that seven years was long outside the statute of limitations for a malpractice claim. The woman opposed the summary judgment motion on the theory of "continuous treatment" by the institution. The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, affirmed a lower court's ruling which denied summary judgment for the hospital. The court found there were still questions of fact regarding whether the child's visits to the hospital during the period from his birth until the lawsuit was filed constituted continuous treatment. There was a strong dissent arguing against both the theory of continuous treatment by an institution and its application to the present case.