Almuganahi v. Gonzalez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Almuganahi v. Gonzalez

2017 NY Slip Op 9093, 156 A.D.3d 1491, 65 N.Y.S.3d 901

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 22, 2017

Docket1551 CA 17-01144

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 9093 (Almuganahi v. Gonzalez) 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.

Bluebook

Almuganahi v. Gonzalez, 2017 NY Slip Op 9093, 156 A.D.3d 1491, 65 N.Y.S.3d 901 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Mark J. Grisanti, A.J.), entered May 30, 2017. The order granted defendant’s motion to bifurcate the trial in this action.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this negligence action seeking damages for injuries that he allegedly sustained when he was riding his bicycle and was involved in an accident with a vehicle operated by defendant. Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in granting defendant’s motion to bifurcate the trial. “As a general rule, issues of liability and damages in a negligence action are distinct and severable issues which should be tried separately” (Turnmire v Concrete Applied Tech. Corp., 56 AD3d 1125, 1128 [4th Dept 2008] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Contrary to plaintiff’s contention, he failed to establish that bifurcation would not “assist in a clarification or simplification of issues and a fair and more expeditious resolution of the action” (22 NYCRR 202.42 [a]; see Piccione v Trimain Dev., 5 AD3d 1086, 1087 [4th Dept 2004]; cf. Mazur v Mazur, 288 AD2d 945, 945-946 [4th Dept 2001]).

Present— Whalen, P.J., Centra, Peradotto, Lindley and Winslow, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Mark J. Grisanti, A.J.), entered May 30, 2017. The order granted defendant’s motion to bifurcate the trial in this action.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this negligence action seeking damages for injuries that he allegedly sustained when he was riding his bicycle and was involved in an accident with a vehicle operated by defendant. Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in granting defendant’s motion to bifurcate the trial. “As a general rule, issues of liability and damages in a negligence action are distinct and severable issues which should be tried separately” (Turnmire v Concrete Applied Tech. Corp., 56 AD3d 1125, 1128 [4th Dept 2008] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Contrary to plaintiff’s contention, he failed to establish that bifurcation would not “assist in a clarification or simplification of issues and a fair and more expeditious resolution of the action” (22 NYCRR 202.42 [a]; see Piccione v Trimain Dev., 5 AD3d 1086, 1087 [4th Dept 2004]; cf. Mazur v Mazur, 288 AD2d 945, 945-946 [4th Dept 2001]).

Present— Whalen, P.J., Centra, Peradotto, Lindley and Winslow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 9093, 156 A.D.3d 1491, 65 N.Y.S.3d 901, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/almuganahi-v-gonzalez-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack