Bragg v. State of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bragg v. State of New York

134 A.D.2d 835, 521 N.Y.S.2d 1002, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51005

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

DecidedNovember 10, 1987

DocketClaim No. 67893

StatusPublished

This text of 134 A.D.2d 835 (Bragg v. State of New York) 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

Bragg v. State of New York, 134 A.D.2d 835, 521 N.Y.S.2d 1002, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51005 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The sole expert evidence offered by claimant regarding the medical malpractice of defendant’s physicians was the testimony of a psychiatrist. The court accorded his testimony little, if any, probative weight. The amount of weight to be accorded the expert’s testimony was for the court, as trier of the facts, to determine (see, Richardson, Evidence § 367 [Prince 10th ed]), and we find no basis to disturb the court’s findings (see, Hale v State of [836]*836New York, 53 AD2d 1025). The record also supports the court’s finding of lack of negligence on the part of nonmedical employees of the Rochester Psychiatric Center. (Appeal from judgment of Court of Claims, Quigley, J. — negligence.) Present —Dillon, P. J., Denman, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.

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

— Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The sole expert evidence offered by claimant regarding the medical malpractice of defendant’s physicians was the testimony of a psychiatrist. The court accorded his testimony little, if any, probative weight. The amount of weight to be accorded the expert’s testimony was for the court, as trier of the facts, to determine (see, Richardson, Evidence § 367 [Prince 10th ed]), and we find no basis to disturb the court’s findings (see, Hale v State of [836]*836New York, 53 AD2d 1025). The record also supports the court’s finding of lack of negligence on the part of nonmedical employees of the Rochester Psychiatric Center. (Appeal from judgment of Court of Claims, Quigley, J. — negligence.) Present —Dillon, P. J., Denman, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

134 A.D.2d 835, 521 N.Y.S.2d 1002, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51005, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bragg-v-state-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack