Majority
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucy Billings, J.), entered October 28, 2009, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiffs’ claim of dental malpractice is primarily predicated on the theory that defendant deviated from accepted standards of care by employing an amalgam that contained mercury, resulting in the patient suffering mercury poisoning, rather than using a premixed, precapsulated amalgam filling. Even assuming defendant met his initial burden of establishing, prima
We have considered defendant’s argument for entitlement to a hearing pursuant to Frye v United States ( 293 F 1013 [DC Cir 1923]) and his challenge to the cause of action for lack of informed consent, and find them both without merit. Concur— Gonzalez, P.J., Sweeny, Richter, Abdus-Salaam and Román, JJ.
Cases cited
- Alvarez v. Prospect Hospital 68 NY2d 320 at 324 p. 473
- Roques v. Noble 73 AD3d 204 p. 473