Yung Wong v. Negron

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Yung Wong v. Negron

294 A.D.2d 358, 741 N.Y.S.2d 714, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4827

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

DecidedMay 6, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 294 A.D.2d 358 (Yung Wong v. Negron) 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

Yung Wong v. Negron, 294 A.D.2d 358, 741 N.Y.S.2d 714, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4827 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Mason, J.), entered October 20, 2000, which, upon a jury verdict on the issue of liability, is in favor of the defendants Carlos Negron and Supreme Trucking, Inc., and against them, dismissing the action.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs’ general objection at trial to admission of the prior statements of a defense witness was insufficient to preserve the issue for appellate review (see Balsz v A & T Bus Co., 252 AD2d 458; Weissman v New York Tel Co., 178 AD2d 353). In any event, the error, if any, was harmless. Ritter, J.P., Feuerstein, Goldstein and Cozier, 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 plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Mason, J.), entered October 20, 2000, which, upon a jury verdict on the issue of liability, is in favor of the defendants Carlos Negron and Supreme Trucking, Inc., and against them, dismissing the action.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs’ general objection at trial to admission of the prior statements of a defense witness was insufficient to preserve the issue for appellate review (see Balsz v A & T Bus Co., 252 AD2d 458; Weissman v New York Tel Co., 178 AD2d 353). In any event, the error, if any, was harmless. Ritter, J.P., Feuerstein, Goldstein and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 358, 741 N.Y.S.2d 714, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4827, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yung-wong-v-negron-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack