Delano v. Grazulewicz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Delano v. Grazulewicz

300 A.D.2d 1064, 751 N.Y.S.2d 912

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

DecidedDecember 30, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 300 A.D.2d 1064 (Delano v. Grazulewicz) 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

Delano v. Grazulewicz, 300 A.D.2d 1064, 751 N.Y.S.2d 912 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (Glownia, J.), entered June 19, 2002, which denied the motion of defendants John F. Grazulewicz and J & M Fast Freight, LLC, to bifurcate the trial.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law without costs and the motion is granted.

Memorandum: Supreme Court abused its discretion in deny[1065]*1065ing the motion of defendants John F. Grazulewicz and J & M Fast Freight, LLC to bifurcate the trial. “Issues of liability and damages in a negligence action are distinct and severable issues that should be tried and determined separately unless [a] plaintiffs injuries have an important bearing on the issue of liability” (Hrusa v Bogdan, 278 AD2d 947, 947). In opposition to the motion, plaintiffs failed to establish that the injuries of plaintiff Cheryl R. Delano “ ‘have an important bearing on the issue of liability and are probative in determining how the accident occurred’ ” (Wesselenyi v Santiago [appeal No. 1], 286 AD2d 964, 964; cf. Tate v Stevens, 275 AD2d 1039, 1040). Nor have plaintiffs established that bifurcation would not “assist in a clarification or simplification of issues and a fair and more expeditious resolution of the action” (22 NYCRR 202.42 [a]; cf. Mazur v Mazur, 288 AD2d 945). Present — Green, J.P., Wisner, Scudder, Kehoe and Gorski, JJ.

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

—Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Erie County (Glownia, J.), entered June 19, 2002, which denied the motion of defendants John F. Grazulewicz and J & M Fast Freight, LLC, to bifurcate the trial.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law without costs and the motion is granted.

Memorandum: Supreme Court abused its discretion in deny[1065]*1065ing the motion of defendants John F. Grazulewicz and J & M Fast Freight, LLC to bifurcate the trial. “Issues of liability and damages in a negligence action are distinct and severable issues that should be tried and determined separately unless [a] plaintiffs injuries have an important bearing on the issue of liability” (Hrusa v Bogdan, 278 AD2d 947, 947). In opposition to the motion, plaintiffs failed to establish that the injuries of plaintiff Cheryl R. Delano “ ‘have an important bearing on the issue of liability and are probative in determining how the accident occurred’ ” (Wesselenyi v Santiago [appeal No. 1], 286 AD2d 964, 964; cf. Tate v Stevens, 275 AD2d 1039, 1040). Nor have plaintiffs established that bifurcation would not “assist in a clarification or simplification of issues and a fair and more expeditious resolution of the action” (22 NYCRR 202.42 [a]; cf. Mazur v Mazur, 288 AD2d 945). Present — Green, J.P., Wisner, Scudder, Kehoe and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

300 A.D.2d 1064, 751 N.Y.S.2d 912, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/delano-v-grazulewicz-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack