
    Bronco Grcic, by Boris Grcic, His Guardian ad Litem, et al., Respondents, v Peninsula Hospital Center, Defendant, and Rafael O. Quinonez et al., Appellants.
   Notwithstanding the fact that plaintiffs’ amended verified complaint is broadly drafted and fails to specify the nature of the allegedly improper treatment, it cannot be deemed insufficient as a matter of law (Torres v Southside Hosp., 84 AD2d 836). There is no basis in law to hold a plaintiff in a medical malpractice action, who most often is less likely than the defendant to have knowledge of proper surgical procedures and medical treatment, to a greater burden than plaintiffs in other types of personal injury actions (Cirelli v Victory Mem. Hosp., 45 AD2d 856). Inasmuch as the complaint sets forth sufficient data for appellants to ascertain what it is that plaintiffs are complaining about (Weber v Wise, 86 AD2d 891), the subject pleading satisfies the basic pleading requirement of CPLR 3013 (see, Siegel, NY Prac § 208). Thompson, J. P., Bracken, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.  