London v. Lepley

259 A.D.2d 298, 684 N.Y.S.2d 785, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2387
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 9, 1999·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered May 6, 1998, dismissing the complaint upon a jury verdict finding that plaintiff did not suffer a serious injury, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff waived her right to a six-person jury by expressly [299]*299consenting to the use of a 12-person jury, and we perceive no public policy invalidating such a waiver (cf., Arizmendi v City of New York, 56 NY2d 753). Plaintiff’s claim that the court should have instructed the jury on “significant disfigurement” is unpreserved for appellate review since she did not request such instruction, did not object to the charge as given and did not object to the contents of the verdict sheet submitted to the jury (CPLR 4110-b; Calabrese v Chan, 244 AD2d 376). In any event, a review of the record reveals that plaintiff presented no evidence of significant disfigurement. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Rubin and Andidas, JJ.

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

London v. Lepley, 259 A.D.2d 298, 684 N.Y.S.2d 785, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2387 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

259 A.D.2d 298 (London v. Lepley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Grace v. New York City Transit Authority
123 A.D.3d 401 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Walker v. Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania
262 A.D.2d 175 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)