Sullivan v. Katz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sullivan v. Katz

7 A.D.3d 513, 775 N.Y.S.2d 593

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

DecidedMay 3, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 7 A.D.3d 513 (Sullivan v. Katz) 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

Sullivan v. Katz, 7 A.D.3d 513, 775 N.Y.S.2d 593 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Weiner, J.), entered January 31, 2003, which, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendant and against them, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, the evidence adduced at trial did not warrant instructing the jury under PJI3d 2:71 (2004 Supp) as to concurrent causes (see Getlin v St. Vincent's Hosp. & Med. Ctr. of N.Y., 117 AD2d 707, 708 [1986]).

The jury verdict was supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see McKnight v LaGuardia Hosp., 263 AD2d 500, 501 [1999]). Altman, J.P., Smith, S. Miller and Crane, 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, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Weiner, J.), entered January 31, 2003, which, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendant and against them, dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, the evidence adduced at trial did not warrant instructing the jury under PJI3d 2:71 (2004 Supp) as to concurrent causes (see Getlin v St. Vincent's Hosp. & Med. Ctr. of N.Y., 117 AD2d 707, 708 [1986]).

The jury verdict was supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see McKnight v LaGuardia Hosp., 263 AD2d 500, 501 [1999]). Altman, J.P., Smith, S. Miller and Crane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 A.D.3d 513, 775 N.Y.S.2d 593, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sullivan-v-katz-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack