Cook v. Waldbaum, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cook v. Waldbaum, Inc.

250 A.D.2d 722, 672 N.Y.S.2d 784, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5822

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

DecidedMay 18, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 250 A.D.2d 722 (Cook v. Waldbaum, Inc.) 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

Cook v. Waldbaum, Inc., 250 A.D.2d 722, 672 N.Y.S.2d 784, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5822 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Dunn, J.), entered April 2, 1997, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendant and against him.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, the trial court’s denial of his application for a single trial on the issues of liability and damages was a proper exercise of its discretion (see, Stanford v Resler, 206 AD2d 468).

Further, the trial court did not err in failing to charge the jury that the plaintiff had a lesser burden of proof due to his memory loss (see, Schechter v Klanfer, 28 NY2d 228). Here, the plaintiff was able to testify, in detail, as to his version of the occurrence and therefore, the Schechter rule does not apply (see, Miceli v GEICO Props., 215 AD2d 461; Fitzgibbon v County of Nassau, 182 AD2d 670; Jarrett v Madifari, 67 AD2d 396).

The plaintiffs remaining contention is without merit. Friedmann, J. P., Goldstein, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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