Elliott v. Guervil

98 A.D.3d 470, 948 N.Y.S.2d 916
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 1, 2012·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

— In a consolidated action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Joseph R. Guervil appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ash, J.), dated September 14, 2011, as, in effect, denied that branch of his motion which was to preclude the plaintiff from offering any evidence at the time of trial with respect to certain magnetic resonance imaging films.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

The appeal must be dismissed because it concerns an evidentiary ruling which, even when “made in advance of trial on motion papers ... is neither appealable as of right nor by permission” (Cotgreave v Public Adm’r of Imperial County [Cal.], 91 AD2d 600, 601 [1982]; see CPLR 5701; Matter of Lyons v Lyons, 86 AD3d 569, 570 [2011]; Cortez v Northeast Realty Holdings, LLC, 78 AD3d 754, 757 [2010]). Skelos, J.P., Dillon, Leventhal and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

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

Elliott v. Guervil, 98 A.D.3d 470, 948 N.Y.S.2d 916 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

98 A.D.3d 470 (Elliott v. Guervil) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Atsaves v. El Caribe Caterers, LLC
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2026
Turner v. State of New York
120 A.D.3d 796 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)