From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Milone v. Milone

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 15, 1999
266 A.D.2d 363 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

Submitted October 8, 1999

November 15, 1999

Rubin, Cooper Burns, Rockville Centre, N.Y. (Leslie F. Burns of counsel), for appellant.

Moran Brodrick, Garden City, N.Y. (Leslie K. Rothkopf of counsel), for respondent.

MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, HOWARD MILLER, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the plaintiff husband appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, for the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Shapiro, J.), entered August 3, 1998, as, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the second cause of action alleging cruel and inhuman treatment.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court erred in restricting the proof at trial to the specific times and occurrences alleged in the complaint, and in refusing to permit evidence designed to show a general course of conduct by the defendant (see, Rusoff v. Rusoff, 20 A.D.2d 794 ;Rasmussen v. Rasmussen, 278 App. Div. 670). However, since there was no showing that the excluded evidence would have had a substantial influence upon the result of the trial, reversal is not warranted (see, CPLR 2002;Walker v. State of New York, 111 A.D.2d 164).

ALTMAN, J.P., FLORIO, H. MILLER, and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Milone v. Milone

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 15, 1999
266 A.D.2d 363 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Milone v. Milone

Case Details

Full title:LOUIS J. MILONE, JR., appellant, v. JEANETTE C. MILONE, respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 15, 1999

Citations

266 A.D.2d 363 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
698 N.Y.S.2d 173

Citing Cases

Sargente v. Mobarakai

We agree with the plaintiff that the Supreme Court erred in precluding her from making an evidentiary showing…

Nineteen Eighty-Nine, LLC v. Icahn

The exclusion of certain testimony during plaintiff's direct examination of Q Investments' principal,…