Lorenzo v. Kahn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lorenzo v. Kahn

100 A.D.3d 1486, 953 N.Y.S.2d 922

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

DecidedNovember 16, 2012

DocketAppeal No. 2

StatusPublished

This text of 100 A.D.3d 1486 (Lorenzo v. Kahn) 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

Lorenzo v. Kahn, 100 A.D.3d 1486, 953 N.Y.S.2d 922 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (John M. Curran, J.), entered October 21, 2011 in a medical malpractice action. The [1487]*1487order, inter alia, denied the cross motion of defendants Liang Bartkowiak, M.D. and Kaleida Health, doing business as Children’s Hospital of Buffalo, also known as Woman’s and Children’s Hospital of Buffalo, also known as Kaleida Health, Inc. to the extent that it sought to strike plaintiffs’ additional supplement to the bill of particulars.

It is hereby ordered that the order insofar as appealed from is reversed on the law without costs and the cross motion is granted in its entirety.

Same memorandum as in Lorenzo v Kahn (100 AD3d 1480 [2012]). Present — Smith, J.P, Peradotto, Garni, Bindley and Martoche, JJ.

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

— Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (John M. Curran, J.), entered October 21, 2011 in a medical malpractice action. The [1487]*1487order, inter alia, denied the cross motion of defendants Liang Bartkowiak, M.D. and Kaleida Health, doing business as Children’s Hospital of Buffalo, also known as Woman’s and Children’s Hospital of Buffalo, also known as Kaleida Health, Inc. to the extent that it sought to strike plaintiffs’ additional supplement to the bill of particulars.

It is hereby ordered that the order insofar as appealed from is reversed on the law without costs and the cross motion is granted in its entirety.

Same memorandum as in Lorenzo v Kahn (100 AD3d 1480 [2012]). Present — Smith, J.P, Peradotto, Garni, Bindley and Martoche, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

100 A.D.3d 1486, 953 N.Y.S.2d 922, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lorenzo-v-kahn-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack