Restagno v. Horwitz

3 Citing cases

  1. Aronov v. Kanarek

    166 A.D.3d 574 (N.Y. App. Div. 2018)   Cited 32 times

    Here, there was no testimony that the defendants deviated from the standard of care in failing to obtain the plaintiff's informed consent to perform a bilateral tubal ligation prior to the first Essure procedure. The interrogatory proposed by the plaintiffs on this issue did not frame an appropriate question for the jury given the evidence (seeRestagno v. Horwitz, 46 A.D.3d 533, 535, 846 N.Y.S.2d 615 ; Marzuillo v. Isom, 277 A.D.2d 362, 363, 716 N.Y.S.2d 98 ). Accordingly, we agree with the Supreme Court's determination to not submit a special interrogatory proposed by the plaintiffs to the jury.

  2. Galarza v. Crown Container Co.

    90 A.D.3d 703 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)   Cited 11 times

    3d 712, 713, 873 N.Y.S.2d 738; Upton v. Redmond Prods., Inc., 23 A.D.3d 551, 552, 806 N.Y.S.2d 653; Martinez v. Town of Babylon, 191 A.D.2d 483, 484, 594 N.Y.S.2d 357; compare Carbocci v. Lake Grove Entertainment, LLC, 64 A.D.3d at 532, 883 N.Y.S.2d 113; Pechersky v. Queens Surface Corp., 18 A.D.3d 842, 795 N.Y.S.2d 465). Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiff's motion for a unified trial, since the plaintiff's injuries did not have a bearing on the issue of liability ( see Winderman v. Brooklyn/McDonald Ave. Shoprite Assoc., Inc., 85 A.D.3d at 1019, 925 N.Y.S.2d 637; Wahid v. Long Is. R.R. Co., 59 A.D.3d at 712, 873 N.Y.S.2d 738; Berman v. County of Suffolk, 26 A.D.3d 307, 308, 812 N.Y.S.2d 559; Vigmostad v. County of Suffolk, 293 A.D.2d 671, 671, 740 N.Y.S.2d 643). Further, “[j]ury interrogatories must be based on claims supported by the evidence” ( Spagnole v. Staten Is. Univ. Hosp., 77 A.D.3d 816, 816, 908 N.Y.S.2d 883; see Restagno v. Horwitz, 46 A.D.3d 533, 535, 846 N.Y.S.2d 615; Marzuillo v. Isom, 277 A.D.2d 362, 363, 716 N.Y.S.2d 98). Here, the plaintiff testified at trial that the garbage truck hit his left side and then went over his right foot with its right wheel.

  3. Allen v. Uh

    82 A.D.3d 1025 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)   Cited 189 times

    The court properly declined the plaintiffs request to add the phrase "in any way" to certain questions on the verdict sheet, where the questions, as set forth, were clear. The trial court also properly declined to include a separate reference to a departure from accepted practice based solely on the alleged failure of the defendant doctor to prescribe antibiotics, as there was no proof in the record that he should have prescribed antibiotics absent a wound culture ( see Spagnole v Staten Is. Univ. Hosp., 77 AD3d 816; Restagno v Horwitz, 46 AD3d 533, 534-535; Marzuillo v Isom, 277 AD2d 362).