Bailey v. Health Insurance Plan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bailey v. Health Insurance Plan

116 A.D.2d 546, 497 N.Y.S.2d 400, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51396

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

DecidedJanuary 13, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 116 A.D.2d 546 (Bailey v. Health Insurance Plan) 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

Bailey v. Health Insurance Plan, 116 A.D.2d 546, 497 N.Y.S.2d 400, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51396 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

In a medical malpractice action, the infant plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kunzeman, J.), entered September 6, 1984, as, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of respondents, and (2) an order of the same court, dated September 18, 1984, as denied that branch of her motion as sought to set aside the verdict rendered in favor of respondents.

Judgment and order affirmed, insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.

Trial Term did not abuse its discretion by limiting of respondents’ expert. An inquiry into the change of opinion in an unrelated case would have created confusion of the issues before the jury (see, People v Schwartzman, 24 NY2d 241, 245; Richardson, Evidence § 491, at 477 [Prince 10th ed]).

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129).

We have reviewed appellant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Gibbons, J. P., Thompson, Brown and Eiber, JJ., concur.

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