Legal Opinion
King v. Burkowski
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 14, 1989PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Baer, Jr., J.), entered July 15, 1988, awarding plaintiff the sum of $75,000, is unanimously affirmed, without costs.
*286The trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to allow defendant Burkowski to testify. A trial court’s discretion to reopen a case after a party has rested should be sparingly exercised (Mulligan v Wetchler, 39 AD2d 102, 105, appeal dismissed 30 NY2d 951). Because defendant Burkowski had an adequate opportunity to testify before his counsel rested, it was not an abuse of discretion for the trial court to refuse him a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- McDougald v. GarberNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
- McDougald v. GarberAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
- Mulligan v. WetchlerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1972
- Mulligan v. WetchlerNew York Court of Appeals · 1972
3Cited by8 opinions
- Lindenman v. KreitzerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- Kay Foundation v. S & F Towing Services of Staten Island, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Dayanim v. UnisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Markham v. ComstockAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Carroll v. GammermanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.