Weiner v. Lenox Hill Hospital

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a hospital’s “failure to adopt and prescribe proper procedures and regulations” for the collection of blood, including testing and screening blood for HIV, sounded in negligence not malpractice
• explaining that where a defendant’s conduct “implicate[s] questions of medical competence or judgment linked to the treatment of [a patient],” the claim sounds in medical malpractice
• holding that hospital negligently collected blood (not malpractice)
• reiterating the standard and holding that failure to maintain a safe blood supply amounts to a claim of failure to maintain proper procedures which is governed by the three year negligence statute of limitations
• \[M]edical malpractice is but a species of negligence and no rigid analytical line separates the two.\
• \[M]edical malpractice is but a species of negligence and no rigid analytical line separates the two.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).