Smith v. Davis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Smith v. Davis

265 A.D.2d 476, 696 N.Y.S.2d 851, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10411

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

DecidedOctober 18, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 265 A.D.2d 476 (Smith v. Davis) 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

Smith v. Davis, 265 A.D.2d 476, 696 N.Y.S.2d 851, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10411 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Levine, J.), dated March 4, 1998, as denied her motion, inter alia, to vacate an order of the same court, dated November 20, 1996, and a judgment of the same court, entered February 11, 1998, dismissing the complaint. The appeal brings up for review so much of an order of the same court, dated October 21, 1998, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination (see, CPLR 5517 [b]).

[477]*477Ordered that the appeal from the order dated March 4, 1998, is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as that order was superseded by the order dated October 21, 1998, made upon re-argument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order dated October 21, 1998, is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements, for reasons stated by Justice Levine at the Supreme Court in his memorandum decision dated March 4, 1998. Santucci, J. P., Joy, Friedmann and Goldstein, 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, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Levine, J.), dated March 4, 1998, as denied her motion, inter alia, to vacate an order of the same court, dated November 20, 1996, and a judgment of the same court, entered February 11, 1998, dismissing the complaint. The appeal brings up for review so much of an order of the same court, dated October 21, 1998, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination (see, CPLR 5517 [b]).

[477]*477Ordered that the appeal from the order dated March 4, 1998, is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as that order was superseded by the order dated October 21, 1998, made upon re-argument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order dated October 21, 1998, is affirmed insofar as reviewed, without costs or disbursements, for reasons stated by Justice Levine at the Supreme Court in his memorandum decision dated March 4, 1998. Santucci, J. P., Joy, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

265 A.D.2d 476, 696 N.Y.S.2d 851, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10411, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-davis-nyappdiv-1999.