Goldberg v. Colliton
A court may award a prejudgment remedy attachment, if probable cause exists that the plaintiff will prevail on the merits in an amount equal to the prejudgment remedy requested, after taking into account any defenses, counterclaims and setoffs. After the decedent passed away, the administrator of his estate sued his doctor, alleging medical malpractice, because the defendant doctor, who is board-certified in internal medicine, allegedly failed to recognize that the plaintiff's decedent suffered from a serious heart condition. The plaintiffs' expert, Stephen Payne, opined that the defendant should have referred the decedent for a full cardiac evaluation, because the decedent's electrocardiogram was abnormal and showed a significant Q wave, the decedent's cholesterol level was elevated, the decedent experienced shortness of breath and the decedent's father suffered from heart disease. Another expert, Dr. Laurence Sloss, testified that the decedent probably passed away because of an acute cardiac arrhythmia that complicated unstable ischemic heart disease, and that prompt diagnosis and intervention likely would have saved the decedent's life. The defendants' experts disagreed. The court found that probable cause exists that the plaintiffs will prevail on the merits of their claim that the decedent's death resulted from the defendant's alleged violation of the medical standard of care. The court granted the plaintiffs' request for a prejudgment remedy in the amount of $500,000.