Opinion
February 11, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Jerry Crispino, J.).
Although we disapprove of plaintiff's attorney's ad hominem attacks on defendant's expert in the course of summation (see, Clarke v. New York City Tr. Auth., 174 A.D.2d 268, 277-278), some of such comments were not objected to, and the remainder were not serious enough to deprive defendant of a fair trial. The trial court properly concluded that prior orders granting summary judgment to impleaded dentists who were employed by defendant did not establish the absence of malpractice by defendant's hygienists, whose "gum treatments" to plaintiff for periodontal disease over many years were alleged, and shown, to be the cause of plaintiff's loss of teeth. We have considered defendant's other arguments and find them to be without merit. The trial court appropriately reduced the jury verdict (see, Guiton v. Gottlieb, 236 A.D.2d 203).
Concur — Williams, J. P., Wallach, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.