| Posokhov v Oselkin |
| 2007 NY Slip Op 08054 [44 AD3d 921] |
| October 23, 2007 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Aleksandr Posokhov, Respondent, v Gregory Oselkin,Appellant. |
—[*1]
In an action to recover damages for dental malpractice, the defendant appeals from an orderof the Supreme Court, Kings County (Levine, J.), dated September 8, 2006, which denied hisrenewed motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendant's renewedmotion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.
"The requisite elements of proof in a medical or dental malpractice action are deviation ordeparture from accepted practice and evidence that such departure was a proximate cause ofinjury or damage" (Calabro vHescheles, 22 AD3d 622 [2005]). The defendant's submissions on his motion forsummary judgment, including the affirmation of his dental expert, established a prima facie casethat his treatment of the plaintiff was not negligent or a proximate cause of the plaintiff's allegedinjuries, thereby shifting to the plaintiff the obligation to show by sufficient evidentiary proof theexistence of a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324[1986]). The conclusory and unsupported allegations of dental malpractice contained in theaffirmation prepared by the plaintiff's expert, submitted in opposition, were insufficient to defeatthe defendant's renewed motion (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d at 325).Schmidt, J.P., Fisher, Lifson and Carni, JJ., concur.