Cegielski v. St. Francis Home

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cegielski v. St. Francis Home

222 A.D.2d 1010, 636 N.Y.S.2d 677, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14046

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

DecidedDecember 22, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 222 A.D.2d 1010 (Cegielski v. St. Francis Home) 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

Cegielski v. St. Francis Home, 222 A.D.2d 1010, 636 N.Y.S.2d 677, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14046 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion to dismiss at the close of proof. Contrary to defendant’s contention, expert testimony was not required to establish a prima facie case because this case involves ordinary negligence, not medical malpractice (see, Kerker v Hurwitz, 163 AD2d 859, remittitur amended 166 AD2d 931; see generally, White v Sheehan Mem. Hosp., 119 AD2d 989). The court also properly refused to charge the affirmative defense of culpable conduct; there was no evidence that plaintiff’s decedent was negligent (see, Willis v Young Men’s Christian Assn., 28 NY2d 375, 377-378). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Notaro, J. — Negligence.) Present — Pine, J. P., Fallon, Wesley, Balio and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion to dismiss at the close of proof. Contrary to defendant’s contention, expert testimony was not required to establish a prima facie case because this case involves ordinary negligence, not medical malpractice (see, Kerker v Hurwitz, 163 AD2d 859, remittitur amended 166 AD2d 931; see generally, White v Sheehan Mem. Hosp., 119 AD2d 989). The court also properly refused to charge the affirmative defense of culpable conduct; there was no evidence that plaintiff’s decedent was negligent (see, Willis v Young Men’s Christian Assn., 28 NY2d 375, 377-378). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Notaro, J. — Negligence.) Present — Pine, J. P., Fallon, Wesley, Balio and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

222 A.D.2d 1010, 636 N.Y.S.2d 677, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14046, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cegielski-v-st-francis-home-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack