Madden v. Desmond

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Madden v. Desmond

39 A.D.3d 822, 835 N.Y.S.2d 337

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

DecidedApril 24, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 39 A.D.3d 822 (Madden v. Desmond) 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

Madden v. Desmond, 39 A.D.3d 822, 835 N.Y.S.2d 337 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice and wrongful death, the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kitzes, J.), dated August 15, 2005, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendants and against them dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

On appeal the plaintiffs raise only one issue, to-wit, that the trial court erred in precluding them from introducing evidence of a consent agreement which the defendant Eric Lubin entered into with the New York Office of Professional Medical Conduct. Before trial testimony was about to commence, counsel and the court engaged in colloquy regarding the issue of questioning Dr. Lubin about the consent agreement, and the court stated, “I don’t believe that you can go into that area.” Counsel for the plaintiffs thereafter simply replied, “okay Judge . . . [w]e can always revisit it.” However, the plaintiffs never again raised the issue during the trial. Under these circumstances, the issue is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPLR 5501 [a] [3]). Ritter, J.E, Santucci, Skelos and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice and wrongful death, the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kitzes, J.), dated August 15, 2005, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendants and against them dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

On appeal the plaintiffs raise only one issue, to-wit, that the trial court erred in precluding them from introducing evidence of a consent agreement which the defendant Eric Lubin entered into with the New York Office of Professional Medical Conduct. Before trial testimony was about to commence, counsel and the court engaged in colloquy regarding the issue of questioning Dr. Lubin about the consent agreement, and the court stated, “I don’t believe that you can go into that area.” Counsel for the plaintiffs thereafter simply replied, “okay Judge . . . [w]e can always revisit it.” However, the plaintiffs never again raised the issue during the trial. Under these circumstances, the issue is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPLR 5501 [a] [3]). Ritter, J.E, Santucci, Skelos and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.3d 822, 835 N.Y.S.2d 337, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/madden-v-desmond-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack