Alburquerque v. Beautiful Village Associates Redevelopment Co.
This text of 219 A.D.2d 567 (Alburquerque v. Beautiful Village Associates Redevelopment Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Salvador Collazo, J.), entered on or about July 21, 1994, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by defendants-appellants’ brief, denied their motion for consolidation, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The IAS Court properly exercised its discretion in denying consolidation of three actions seeking to recover for personal injuries arising out of three separate and distinct incidents. As the IAS Court aptly stated after correctly noting that the only factor of any significance common to the actions is the plaintiff’s identity, a single trial involving 15 defendants implicated for varying, unrelated reasons would complicate the issues. It would lead to jury confusion, and, in the present cir[568]*568cumstances, would also prejudice the prosecution of the action that is at an advanced stage of readiness (see, Shackleford v Mills, 110 AD2d 630; Hutton & Co. v Tretiak, 140 AD2d 294; Nicolla v Nicolla, 128 AD2d 998). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Asch, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
219 A.D.2d 567, 631 N.Y.S.2d 357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alburquerque-v-beautiful-village-associates-redevelopment-co-nyappdiv-1995.