Goberdhan v. Cornell Univ.
2025 NY Slip Op 51015(U)
N.Y. Sup. Ct., Nassau Cty.2025Background
- Plaintiff, Tirbhawan Goberdhan, owned a horse that died two days after being discharged from veterinary treatment at Cornell University and under Dr. Samuel Hurcombe’s care.
- The horse had undergone two hospitalizations at Cornell: first for surgery on its leg, later for emergency gastrointestinal surgery after experiencing severe colic.
- After the second surgery, the horse was discharged to Goberdhan’s designated agents (trainer and primary care veterinarian), with instructions for further care.
- Plaintiff sued Dr. Hurcombe and Cornell, alleging improper veterinary care, abandonment, and seeking damages for the horse’s death and emotional distress.
- Defendants moved for summary judgment, asserting that care met veterinary standards and that plaintiff had failed to present expert evidence of malpractice or abandonment.
- Plaintiff opposed based only on his attorney’s affidavit, arguing abandonment but providing no expert testimony.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Veterinary malpractice | Defendants failed to render proper care, causing death | Care met accepted standards; plaintiff showed no breach | For defendants; no evidence of breach |
| Abandonment of care | Horse was discharged too soon (constituted abandonment) | Care was transferred to qualified agents; no abandonment | For defendants; no abandonment shown |
| Appropriateness of discharge | Discharge occurred while horse was still symptomatic | Horse was stable, improved, and discharge was appropriate | For defendants; discharge was proper |
| Necessity/non-necessity of expert testimony | Lay judgment sufficient; acts bespeak malpractice | Expert testimony required and provided; plaintiff gave none | For defendants; expert testimony needed |
Key Cases Cited
- Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 (standard for summary judgment motions)
- Zuckerman v. New York, 49 NY2d 557 (need for evidentiary proof to oppose summary judgment)
- Jason v. Parks, 224 AD2d 494 (no damages for emotional distress for pet's death)
- Bing v. Thunig, 2 NY2d 656 (vicarious liability requires underlying negligence)
- Mitchell v. Goncalves, 179 AD3d 787 (vicarious liability claim fails absent negligence)