Opinion
Argued June 15, 2000
October 2, 2000.
In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Alpert, J.), entered May 8, 1999, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendants and against them dismissing the complaint.
Herman M. Koenigsberg, P.C., Harrison, N.Y. (Annette G. Hasapidis of counsel), for appellants.
Bartlett, McDonough, Bastone Monaghan, LLP, White Plains, N Y (Edward J. Guardaro, Jr., of counsel), for respondents.
Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, LEO F. McGINITY, NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The cross-examination of the plaintiff Daniel Bivona was relevant to his ability to perceive and remember events and, thus, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in allowing this testimony (see, Murphy v. Estate of Vece, 173 A.D.2d 445, 446- 447; cf., People v. Marsh, 264 A.D.2d 647; People v. Billups, 132 A.D.2d 612). In addition, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in permitting the defendants to question the qualifications of the plaintiffs' expert witness on cross-examination (see, Murphy v. Estate of Vece, supra, at 446).
The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are either without merit or do not require reversal.