Dorn v. Bareket

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dorn v. Bareket

215 A.D.2d 521, 627 N.Y.S.2d 946, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5053

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

DecidedMay 15, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 215 A.D.2d 521 (Dorn v. Bareket) 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

Dorn v. Bareket, 215 A.D.2d 521, 627 N.Y.S.2d 946, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5053 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for medical malpractice, the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Stolarik, J.), dated June 17, 1993, which, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendants Henry Z. Bareket and Louis H. Lefkowitz, dismissed the complaint insofar as asserted against those defendants.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs failed to preserve for appellate review their claim that the respondents’ counsel impermissibly impeached the plaintiffs’ expert medical witness with a medical treatise that the expert did not accept as authoritative (see, Labate v Plotkin, 195 AD2d 444; Walsh v Staten Is. Obstetrics & Gynecology Assocs., 193 AD2d 672). The plaintiffs’ remaining contention does not warrant reversal. Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Santucci and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for medical malpractice, the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Stolarik, J.), dated June 17, 1993, which, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendants Henry Z. Bareket and Louis H. Lefkowitz, dismissed the complaint insofar as asserted against those defendants.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs failed to preserve for appellate review their claim that the respondents’ counsel impermissibly impeached the plaintiffs’ expert medical witness with a medical treatise that the expert did not accept as authoritative (see, Labate v Plotkin, 195 AD2d 444; Walsh v Staten Is. Obstetrics & Gynecology Assocs., 193 AD2d 672). The plaintiffs’ remaining contention does not warrant reversal. Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Santucci and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 A.D.2d 521, 627 N.Y.S.2d 946, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5053, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dorn-v-bareket-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack