Legal Opinion

Brandt v. Glottstein

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided October 22, 1959PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

It was error to permit plaintiff to prove items of damages which were not specified in the bill of particulars (Voccia v. Pleasure Boat Co., 239 App. Div. 165, affd. 264 N. Y. 656). There shall be no reference to the fact that plaintiff received compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Law since such fact is immaterial upon an assessment of damages.

The judgment should be unanimously reversed on the law, without costs, with leave to plaintiff to move to file a further bill of particulars upon such terms as the court below may deem proper and matter remitted to the court below for…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Voccia v. Pleasure Boat Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933
  2. Voccia v. Pleasure Boat CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1934

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Soundwall Construction Corp. v. Moncarol Construction Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1968

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API