From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Padovani v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 23, 2007
44 A.D.3d 917 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 2006-08974.

October 23, 2007.

In an action to recover damages for dental malpractice, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Smith, J.), dated August 25, 2006, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendants and against him dismissing the complaint.

Gary Greenwald, Chester, N.Y. (Marc R. Leffler and David A. Brodsky of counsel), for appellant.

Lutfy Santora, Staten Island, N.Y. (James L. Lutfy of counsel), for respondents Gerald E. Miller and Gerald E. Miller, D.M.D., P.C.

Before: Spolzino, J.P., Santucci, Balkin and Dickerson, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court erred in excluding from evidence a portion of the deposition testimony of the defendant Gerald E. Miller (see CPLR 3117 [a] [2]; Fanek v City of Yonkers, 287 AD2d 683) and in prospectively precluding the parties from objecting to summations ( see Roma v Blaustein, 44 AD2d 576, 577). Nevertheless, we decline to reverse the judgment in favor of the defendants because the errors were harmless ( see CPLR 2002; Maione v Pindyck, 32 AD3d 827; Gilbert v Luvin, 286 AD2d 600; Sperin v Good Samaritan Hosp., 250 AD2d 755; Lauter v Village of Great Neck, 231 AD2d 553, 555; see also Mullen v Eswar, 233 AD2d 376).

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.


Summaries of

Padovani v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 23, 2007
44 A.D.3d 917 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

Padovani v. Miller

Case Details

Full title:ALBERT PADOVANI, Appellant, v. GERALD E. MILLER et al., Respondents

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Oct 23, 2007

Citations

44 A.D.3d 917 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 8048
843 N.Y.S.2d 518

Citing Cases

Rio v. Edison

The plaintiff also failed to preserve for appellate review her contentions regarding counsel's summation (…

Collins v. 7-11 Corp.

The plaintiff correctly contends that the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying his…