Is a Clinic Owner Liable for the Malpractice of His Associate ?

In Hill v. St. Clare's Hosp., 67 N.Y.2d 72, 499 N.Y.S.2d 904, 490 N.E.2d 823 (1986), the Court of Appeals held that a physician who had adopted the name of a certain clinic in connection his practice could be held vicariously liable for the negligence of another physician practicing under the clinic name, even in the absence of a formal partnership. The relevant facts in Hill included the patient's prior relationship with the clinic, rather than with the physician who treated him, that billing was done in the name of the clinic, rather than the treating physician, and that there were other outward indications of a joint practice. On the basis of these facts, the Court of Appeals held that there was sufficient evidence for a jury to find the clinic owner liable for the malpractice of his associate. Id.; See also: Syracuse v. Diao, 272 A.D.2d 881, 707 N.Y.S.2d 570 (4th Dept. 2000); Fassino v. Hudson Valley Family Dental Services, P.C., 244 A.D.2d 383, 665 N.Y.S.2d 540 (2nd Dept. 1997); Hovsepian v. Kleinman-Cindrich, 239 A.D.2d 317, 657 N.Y.S.2d 991 (2nd Dept. 1997); Lanza v. Parkeast Hosp., 102 A.D.2d 741, 476 N.Y.S.2d 576 (1st Dept. 1984).