From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

White v. Luna

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
May 18, 2016
139 A.D.3d 939 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)

Opinion

05-18-2016

Kirk WHITE, respondent, et al., plaintiffs, v. Victor LUNA, et al., appellants, et al., defendant.

Baker, McEvoy, Morrissey & Moskovits, P.C. (Mauro Lilling Naparty LLP, Woodbury, NY [Matthew W. Naparty and Seth M. Weinberg ], of counsel), for appellants. Sacco & Fillas, LLP, Astoria, NY (Lamont K. Rodgers of counsel), for respondent.


Baker, McEvoy, Morrissey & Moskovits, P.C. (Mauro Lilling Naparty LLP, Woodbury, NY [Matthew W. Naparty and Seth M. Weinberg ], of counsel), for appellants.

Sacco & Fillas, LLP, Astoria, NY (Lamont K. Rodgers of counsel), for respondent.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Victor Luna and Ramiro Luna appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Baily–Schiffman, J.), dated August 7, 2014, which, upon a jury verdict on the issue of damages awarding the plaintiff Kirk White the principal sum of $400,000, is in favor of the plaintiff Kirk White and against them in the principal sum of $400,000.

ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for a new trial on the issue of damages only.

During the damages phase of this bifurcated trial, the Supreme Court precluded the appellants' biomechanical engineer from testifying. The determination of a witness's qualification to testify as an expert rests in the discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed in the absence of a serious mistake, an error of law, or an improvident exercise of discretion (see Werner v. Sun Oil Co., 65 N.Y.2d 839, 840, 493 N.Y.S.2d 125, 482 N.E.2d 921 ; Steinbuch v. Stern, 2 A.D.3d 709, 710, 770 N.Y.S.2d 106 ). Here, the Supreme Court erred in denying the appellants the opportunity to lay a foundation for the proposed expert testimony of their biomechanical engineer (see Werner v. Sun Oil Co., 65 N.Y.2d 839, 493 N.Y.S.2d 125, 482 N.E.2d 921 ; Wichy v. City of New York, 304 A.D.2d 755, 756, 758 N.Y.S.2d 385 ). Accordingly, a new trial on the issue of damages is warranted.

MASTRO, J.P., CHAMBERS, DICKERSON and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

White v. Luna

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
May 18, 2016
139 A.D.3d 939 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
Case details for

White v. Luna

Case Details

Full title:Kirk WHITE, respondent, et al., plaintiffs, v. Victor LUNA, et al.…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: May 18, 2016

Citations

139 A.D.3d 939 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 3874
30 N.Y.S.3d 575

Citing Cases

Singh v. Siddique

The second principle is that, in the few New York appellate decisions on the subject, there are none which…

Singh v. Siddique

The second principle is that, in the few New York appellate decisions on the subject, there are none which…