A state appeals court has reversed a $50,000 award to a former New York state prison inmate who claims he never got proper medical care for an injury suffered when he was incarcerated.
Claimant Terry Smith was punched in the eye on Sept. 14, 2006, by another inmate at Attica Correctional Facility in Wyoming County.
The punch fractured Smith’s eye socket, pushed his eyeball deep into the socket, causing blurred and double vision, and limited his ability to read more than 20 minutes per day, according to court papers.
In January 2013, Smith filed his claim against New York state in the Court of Claims. He was paroled in 2016. Smith has represented himself since May of 2023.
“The court finds that defendant had a duty to provide Smith with timely and adequate medical care for his orbital fracture,” Court of Claims Judge Stephanie A. Saunders wrote in her decision, dated Dec. 31, 2024.
“As an incarcerated individual, Smith did not have the luxury of choosing his provider or control over when he saw a medical provider,” Saunders wrote.
“This claim has been pending in the system for 11 years, and the paucity of medical records was troublesome to this court, because it was difficult to develop a complete picture of when and why certain decisions were made,” Saunders wrote.
Smith “saw multiple providers and multiple specialists over the course of eight years, with various specialists recommending different treatment plans, including recommendations for surgery, which defendant ignored,” Saunders wrote.
“The court opines that an expert is not needed to conclude that earlier surgical intervention by defendant … would have resulted in a more positive outcome,” she wrote.
The state appealed Saunders’ ruling, and the Appellate Division of state Supreme Court, Fourth Department, unanimously reversed Saunders’ ruling and dismissed the claim.
Saunders determined, after a trial, that the state was liable for medical negligence based on the correctional facilities’ failure to arrange for appropriate diagnosis and treatment of claimant.
“We reverse. We agree with defendant that the court should have dismissed the claim based upon claimant’s failure to present any expert medical evidence,” the Fourth Department panel wrote.
“An allegation that the lack of medical treatment resulted in injury is an allegation concerning the medical consequences of the lack of treatment that is not within the ordinary experience and knowledge of laypersons. Expert medical opinion evidence was therefore required,” the court wrote.
[email protected] / (585) 232-2035