From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Piotrowski v. Patel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 9, 2001
288 A.D.2d 918 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

(1393) CA 00-02192.

November 9, 2001.

(Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Mintz, J. — Negligence.)

PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., GREEN, WISNER, KEHOE AND BURNS, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum:

Supreme Court properly denied plaintiffs' motion to set aside the verdict and for a new trial ( see, CPLR 4404 [a]) based upon the allegedly false testimony of defendant's expert witness. Plaintiffs failed to establish that the evidence supporting their motion could not have been discovered earlier with due diligence or that the "evidence is 'of such a nature, and is so positive and convincing, that it [would have], in all probability, produce[d] a different result'" ( Bertan v. Richmond Mem. Hosp. Health Ctr., 131 A.D.2d 799, 801, quoting Collins v. Central Trust Co., 226 App. Div. 486, 488).


Summaries of

Piotrowski v. Patel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 9, 2001
288 A.D.2d 918 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Piotrowski v. Patel

Case Details

Full title:VIOLA PIOTROWSKI AND STANLEY PIOTROWSKI, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. DILIP…

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

Date published: Nov 9, 2001

Citations

288 A.D.2d 918 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
733 N.Y.S.2d 670