Leff v. Soley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Leff v. Soley

78 A.D.2d 636, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13109

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

DecidedOctober 6, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 78 A.D.2d 636 (Leff v. Soley) 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

Leff v. Soley, 78 A.D.2d 636, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13109 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

In a medical malpractice action, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered April 24, 1979, which denied their motion, inter alia, to set aside the jury verdict, which was against them and in favor of the defendant. We deem the notice of appeal to be a premature notice of appeal from the judgment which was entered on the verdict on July 18, 1979 (see CPLR 5520, subd [c]). Judgment affirmed, with costs. Under the circumstances of the instant case, the trial court properly refused to instruct the jury on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur (see Pipers v Rosenow, 39 AD2d 240, 243-245 [opn by Hopkins, J.]; see, also, De Falco v Long Is. Coll. Hosp., 90 Misc 2d 164, 168, affd 62 AD2d 1180). We have considered appellants’ remaining contentions and find them to be lacking in merit. Damiani, J. P., Gibbons, Gulotta and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

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

In a medical malpractice action, plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered April 24, 1979, which denied their motion, inter alia, to set aside the jury verdict, which was against them and in favor of the defendant. We deem the notice of appeal to be a premature notice of appeal from the judgment which was entered on the verdict on July 18, 1979 (see CPLR 5520, subd [c]). Judgment affirmed, with costs. Under the circumstances of the instant case, the trial court properly refused to instruct the jury on the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur (see Pipers v Rosenow, 39 AD2d 240, 243-245 [opn by Hopkins, J.]; see, also, De Falco v Long Is. Coll. Hosp., 90 Misc 2d 164, 168, affd 62 AD2d 1180). We have considered appellants’ remaining contentions and find them to be lacking in merit. Damiani, J. P., Gibbons, Gulotta and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

78 A.D.2d 636, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13109, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leff-v-soley-nyappdiv-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack