Legal Opinion
Taromina v. Presbyterian Hospital
New York Supreme Court
Decided February 13, 1997PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Ira Gammerman, J.
This is the fourth opinion1 I have written on CPLR articles 50-A and 50-B and is made necessary by an error in the method *619used to calculate the attorney’s fee in Petrides v Goodgold (170 Misc 2d 770, supra) and, more importantly, by a misinterpretation of the Court of Appeals decision in Rohring v City of Niagara Falls (84 NY2d 60) by the trial court in Silvestri v Small-berg (165 Misc 2d 827), which error was not raised on appeal in either the Appellate Division or the Court of Appeals and thus never corrected.
In this case the jury made the following…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Rohring v. City of Niagara FallsNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- Rohring v. City of Niagara FallsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Ursini v. SussmanNew York Supreme Court · 1989
- Andrialis v. SnyderNew York Supreme Court · 1993
- Petrides v. GoodgoldNew York Supreme Court · 1995
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Damiano v. Exide Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1997
- Fisk v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Flynn v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1998
- McGilloway v. Block 1289 AssociatesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- Rodgers v. 72nd Street AssociatesNew York Supreme Court · 1998