Apikoglu v. Leitman

92 A.D.3d 623, 937 N.Y.2d 888
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 7, 2012
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 92 A.D.3d 623 (Apikoglu v. Leitman) 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
Apikoglu v. Leitman, 92 A.D.3d 623, 937 N.Y.2d 888 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in precluding the plaintiffs expert from testifying that the failure to perform CT scans on the plaintiffs decedent between April 9, 2002, and April 11, 2002, as well as the failure to perform a third surgery, were departures from the accepted standard of care. The plaintiff failed to give notice prior to trial of the specific subject matter of the expert’s testimony setting forth these different theories of recovery, which were not readily discernable from the plaintiffs bills of particulars and the statements in her CPLR 3101 (d) responses (see Ryan v St. Francis Hosp., 62 AD3d 857 [2009]; Durant v Shuren, 33 AD3d 843, 844 [2006]; Dalrymple v Koka, 2 AD3d 769, 771 [2003]).

The plaintiffs remaining contention is without merit. Skelos, J.E, Chambers, Sgroi and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Owens v. Ascencio
178 N.Y.S.3d 530 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
92 A.D.3d 623, 937 N.Y.2d 888, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/apikoglu-v-leitman-nyappdiv-2012.