Marabini v. Huntington Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Marabini v. Huntington Hospital

288 A.D.2d 274, 732 N.Y.S.2d 889, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10885

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

DecidedNovember 13, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 288 A.D.2d 274 (Marabini v. Huntington Hospital) 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

Marabini v. Huntington Hospital, 288 A.D.2d 274, 732 N.Y.S.2d 889, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10885 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Floyd, J.), entered March 16, 2000, which, upon a jury verdict, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contentions, none of the trial rulings challenged on appeal warrant reversal, “since they reflect an appropriate exercise of the trial court’s discretionary power to control the litigation before it” (Hornick v Mandel, 166 AD2d 361).

In addition, at no time did the Trial Judge demonstrate a personal bias against the plaintiff or in favor of the defendant. O’Brien, J. P., McGinity, H. Miller and Adams, 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 personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Floyd, J.), entered March 16, 2000, which, upon a jury verdict, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contentions, none of the trial rulings challenged on appeal warrant reversal, “since they reflect an appropriate exercise of the trial court’s discretionary power to control the litigation before it” (Hornick v Mandel, 166 AD2d 361).

In addition, at no time did the Trial Judge demonstrate a personal bias against the plaintiff or in favor of the defendant. O’Brien, J. P., McGinity, H. Miller and Adams, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

288 A.D.2d 274, 732 N.Y.S.2d 889, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10885, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marabini-v-huntington-hospital-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack