Antoine v. Gulmi
This text of 275 A.D.2d 294 (Antoine v. Gulmi) 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
—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Patterson, J.), entered December 23,1998, which, upon the granting of the defendants’ motion pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law dismissing the plaintiffs cause of action to recover damages based upon lack of informed consent, and upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendants and against him dismissing the complaint, and (2) an order of the same court dated September 8, 1999, which denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 to set aside the verdict.
Ordered that the judgment and the order are affirmed, with one bill of costs.
The Supreme Court properly granted the defendants’ motion pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law dismissing the plaintiffs cause of action to recover damages based upon lack of informed consent since the plaintiff failed to adduce expert medical testimony in support of the alleged qualitative insufficiency of the consent (see, CPLR 4401-a; see also, Davis v Caldwell, 54 NY2d 176, 182).
The plaintiffs remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Altman and H. Miller, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
275 A.D.2d 294, 713 N.Y.S.2d 121, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8713, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/antoine-v-gulmi-nyappdiv-2000.