Schmaeling v. Cook

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Schmaeling v. Cook

18 A.D.3d 730, 794 N.Y.S.2d 921

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 23, 2005·Published

Opinion

— In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Huttner, J.), dated April 27, 2004, which, upon a jury verdict on the issue of damages, is in favor of the plaintiff James Schmaeling and against her in the principal sum of $155,000.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Under the particular facts of this case, the errors claimed by the defendant were not so fundamental in nature as to warrant a new trial (see McIntosh v City of New York, 13 AD3d 421, 422 [2004]; Rockowitz v Greenstein, 11 AD3d 523, 524 [2004]). Schmidt, J.P, Santucci, Rivera and Spolzino, 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., the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Huttner, J.), dated April 27, 2004, which, upon a jury verdict on the issue of damages, is in favor of the plaintiff James Schmaeling and against her in the principal sum of $155,000.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Under the particular facts of this case, the errors claimed by the defendant were not so fundamental in nature as to warrant a new trial (see McIntosh v City of New York, 13 AD3d 421, 422 [2004]; Rockowitz v Greenstein, 11 AD3d 523, 524 [2004]). Schmidt, J.P, Santucci, Rivera and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

Schmaeling v. Cook, 18 A.D.3d 730, 794 N.Y.S.2d 921 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

18 A.D.3d 730 (Schmaeling v. Cook) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related