From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Reid v. Haher

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 24, 1982
88 A.D.2d 873 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

Opinion

June 24, 1982


Order, Supreme Court, New York County (M. Taylor, J.) entered January 7, 1981, denying defendant's motion to sever actions brought by separate plaintiffs and based upon separate transactions, reversed, on the law and on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and the motion for severance granted. A single complaint asserts separate malpractice actions arising out of unrelated transactions and involving different plaintiffs. The two wholly separate transactions are primarily linked by the fact that the same doctor is charged with malpractice and that the different plaintiffs are represented by the same lawyer. Under the circumstances we think it unnecessary to await the determination of a Trial Judge to decide that a severance is required "[i]n furtherance of convenience or to avoid prejudice". (CPLR 603.)

Concur — Sandler, J.P., Carro, Bloom, Fein and Milonas, JJ.


Summaries of

Reid v. Haher

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 24, 1982
88 A.D.2d 873 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)
Case details for

Reid v. Haher

Case Details

Full title:EVELYN REID et al., Respondents, v. JANE HAHER, Appellant, et al.…

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

Date published: Jun 24, 1982

Citations

88 A.D.2d 873 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

Citing Cases

Henry v. 4395 Broadway Owners L.P.

The factors to be weighed when severing a cause of action are efficiency of the discovery process, delay of…

Wynne v. JPMorgan Chase & Co.

The determination of whether to grant or deny a request for a severance pursuant to CPLR 603 is a matter of…