FKB’s Tracy S. Katz obtains summary judgment on behalf of a pulmonary/critical care physician in a case alleging defendants failed to diagnose and treat a bowel perforation.  Plaintiff alleged that FKB’s client, a pulmonary/critical care physician, failed to timely diagnose and treat plaintiff’s infection, sepsis, bowel ischemia and perforation, resulting in a perforated bowel and the need for numerous subsequent surgeries to her abdomen.  FKB moved for summary judgment with an expert affirmation affirming that the care and treatment rendered by FKB’s client while the patient was in the ICU was entirely appropriate and not the proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injuries.  The expert opined that based on plaintiff’s clinical presentation, labs, and imaging while under FKB’s client’s care in the ICU, she did not have sepsis, bowel ischemia, or bowel perforation.  Furthermore, the expert opined that while the plaintiff ultimately developed a gangrenous and perforated bowel, that this condition unequivocally did not exist at the time FKB’s client treated the patient.  Plaintiff’s counsel opposed FKB’s motion and served an expert affirmation in opposition; however, the Court held that plaintiff’s expert’s opinions lacked probative value and failed to raise triable issues of fact.  The Court dismissed the case against FKB’s client.