Pocchia v. Motahedeh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pocchia v. Motahedeh

154 A.D.2d 662, 547 N.Y.S.2d 249, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13789

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

DecidedOctober 30, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 154 A.D.2d 662 (Pocchia v. Motahedeh) 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

Pocchia v. Motahedeh, 154 A.D.2d 662, 547 N.Y.S.2d 249, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13789 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., based on negligence and medical malpractice, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bellard, J.), dated September 26, 1988, which denied his motion to limit a retrial to the sole theory of liability submitted to the jury in the first trial.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

The trial court ruled that evidence of all of the plaintiffs’ theories of medical malpractice would be admissible at the retrial of this action (see, Pocchia v Motahedeh, 123 AD2d 426). It is well settled that no appeal lies from an order adjudicating in advance of trial the admissibility of evidence (CPLR 5701; Menis v Raksin, 154 AD2d 357; Pellegrino v New York City Tr. Auth., 141 AD2d 709). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Brown, J. P., Lawrence, Eiber and Spatt, 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, etc., based on negligence and medical malpractice, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bellard, J.), dated September 26, 1988, which denied his motion to limit a retrial to the sole theory of liability submitted to the jury in the first trial.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

The trial court ruled that evidence of all of the plaintiffs’ theories of medical malpractice would be admissible at the retrial of this action (see, Pocchia v Motahedeh, 123 AD2d 426). It is well settled that no appeal lies from an order adjudicating in advance of trial the admissibility of evidence (CPLR 5701; Menis v Raksin, 154 AD2d 357; Pellegrino v New York City Tr. Auth., 141 AD2d 709). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Brown, J. P., Lawrence, Eiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

154 A.D.2d 662, 547 N.Y.S.2d 249, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13789, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pocchia-v-motahedeh-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack