Majority
—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The respondent, Dr. William M. Fuchs, established a prima facie case of his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. He presented uncontradicted evidence that he examined the decedent, Ophelia White, only once, solely for the purpose of a pre-employment physical and that he did not thereafter provide any treatment to her. Accordingly, no physician-patient relationship was created unless Dr. Fuchs affirmatively advised the decedent as to a course of treatment (see, Heller v Peekskill Community Hosp., 198 AD2d 265 ; Hickey v Travelers Ins. Co., 158 AD2d 112 ). The evidence that Dr. Fuchs advised the decedent of a positive tuberculosis test result and that she should obtain a second opinion is insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact that Dr. Fuchs affirmatively advised the decedent as to a course of treatment (see, Durso v City of New York, 251 AD2d 8 ; Violandi v City of New York, 184 AD2d 364 ; cf., Forrester v Zwanger-Pesiri Radiology Group, 274 AD2d 374 ; Heller v Peekskill Community Hosp., supra). As liability for medical malpractice may not be imposed in the absence of a physician-patient relationship, the Supreme Court properly granted the motion of Dr. Fuchs for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him (see, Zimmerly v Good Samaritan Hosp., 261 AD2d 614 ). O’Brien, J. P., Friedmann, H. Miller and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- Heller v. Peekskill Community Hospital 198 AD2d 265 p. 475
- Hickey v. Travelers Insurance 158 AD2d 112 p. 475
- Durso v. City of New York 251 AD2d 8 p. 475
- Violandi v. City of New York 184 AD2d 364 p. 475
- Forrester v. Zwanger-Pesiri Radiology Group 274 AD2d 374 p. 475