Sommer v. Pierre

51 A.D.3d 464, 856 N.Y.S.2d 619
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 6, 2008·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, [465] New York County (Deborah A. Kaplan, J.), entered January 17, 2008, which, to the extent appealed from, denied defendants’ motion to bifurcate the trial on issues of liability and damages, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Bifurcation is appropriate in complicated cases of liability and damages where such clarification or simplification will assist in reaching a fair and more expeditious resolution of the issues (22 NYCRR 202.42 [a]; Mazur v Mazur, 288 AD2d 945 [2001]). A ruling on such a request is a matter of discretion as to which the trial court should be afforded great deference (Johnson v Hudson Riv. Constr. Co., Inc., 13 AD3d 864 [2004]). In this case, fairness and convenience weigh in favor of a unified trial, which will serve to prevent a verdict based on undue sympathy for either party. Concur—Tom, J.P., Andrias, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

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

Sommer v. Pierre, 51 A.D.3d 464, 856 N.Y.S.2d 619 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

51 A.D.3d 464 (Sommer v. Pierre) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Castro v. Malia Realty, LLC
2019 NY Slip Op 6466 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Keane v. Piers
71 A.D.3d 593 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Carpenter v. County of Essex
67 A.D.3d 1106 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)