Kasprzak v. Delaware YMCA

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kasprzak v. Delaware YMCA

289 A.D.2d 1002, 735 N.Y.S.2d 445, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12569

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 21, 2001·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly exercised its discretion in rescinding its prior order for a bifurcated trial. As the court noted, the case was relatively uncomplicated, several of the same witnesses would be required to testify at both the liability and damages trials, and only one expert witness was expected to testify at the damages trial. Thus, defendant did not demonstrate that bifurcation would lead to a “more expeditious resolution of the action” (22 NYCRR 202.42 [a]). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Mahoney, J. — Bifurcate Trial.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Hayes, Wisner, Scudder and Burns, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly exercised its discretion in rescinding its prior order for a bifurcated trial. As the court noted, the case was relatively uncomplicated, several of the same witnesses would be required to testify at both the liability and damages trials, and only one expert witness was expected to testify at the damages trial. Thus, defendant did not demonstrate that bifurcation would lead to a “more expeditious resolution of the action” (22 NYCRR 202.42 [a]). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Mahoney, J. — Bifurcate Trial.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Hayes, Wisner, Scudder and Burns, JJ.

Kasprzak v. Delaware YMCA, 289 A.D.2d 1002, 735 N.Y.S.2d 445, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12569 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

289 A.D.2d 1002 (Kasprzak v. Delaware YMCA) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related