Gallo v. Ricci

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gallo v. Ricci

28 A.D.3d 1111, 813 N.Y.S.2d 323

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

DecidedApril 28, 2006

DocketAppeal No. 2

StatusPublished

This text of 28 A.D.3d 1111 (Gallo v. Ricci) 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

Gallo v. Ricci, 28 A.D.3d 1111, 813 N.Y.S.2d 323 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal and cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (David J. Mahoney, J.), entered December 30, 2004 in a personal injury action. The order, inter alia, denied plaintiffs motion seeking, inter alia, to set aside the jury verdict with respect to defendant John E. Jacobs.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal and cross appeal insofar as they concern the motion be and the same hereby are [1112]*1112unanimously dismissed (see Smith v Catholic Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn & Queens, 155 AD2d 435 [1989]; see also CPLR 5501 [a] [1], [2]) and the order is affirmed without costs.

Same memorandum as in Gallo v Ricci ([appeal No. 1] 28 AD3d 1110 [2006]). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Hurlbutt, Scudder, Kehoe and Hayes, JJ.

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

Appeal and cross appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (David J. Mahoney, J.), entered December 30, 2004 in a personal injury action. The order, inter alia, denied plaintiffs motion seeking, inter alia, to set aside the jury verdict with respect to defendant John E. Jacobs.

It is hereby ordered that said appeal and cross appeal insofar as they concern the motion be and the same hereby are [1112]*1112unanimously dismissed (see Smith v Catholic Med. Ctr. of Brooklyn & Queens, 155 AD2d 435 [1989]; see also CPLR 5501 [a] [1], [2]) and the order is affirmed without costs.

Same memorandum as in Gallo v Ricci ([appeal No. 1] 28 AD3d 1110 [2006]). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Hurlbutt, Scudder, Kehoe and Hayes, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 A.D.3d 1111, 813 N.Y.S.2d 323, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gallo-v-ricci-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack