From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Paige v. Rocco

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 17, 1995
214 A.D.2d 663 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

April 17, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County.


Upon the papers filed in support of the motion and the papers filed in opposition thereto, it is

Ordered that the motion is granted.

The portions of the appellant's reply brief which argue that: (1) the accident at issue was caused by the attempt of the plaintiff to grab the steering wheel of the automobile driven by Ernest Rocco, and (2) the Supreme Court erred, during summation, in preventing the appellant from referring to a report in evidence regarding this matter, are stricken from the reply brief because they were raised for the first time in the reply brief (see, State Farm Fire Gas Co. v LiMauro, 103 A.D.2d 514, 521-522, affd 65 N.Y.2d 369). Sullivan, J.P., Copertino, Hart and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Paige v. Rocco

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 17, 1995
214 A.D.2d 663 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Paige v. Rocco

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD PAIGE, JR., Plaintiff, v. ERNEST ROCCO, Defendant. (Action No. 1.…

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

Date published: Apr 17, 1995

Citations

214 A.D.2d 663 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
625 N.Y.S.2d 925

Citing Cases

Moore v. County of Clinton

Defendants' reply brief raises a third issue. As the issue was not raised in defendants' main brief, we will…

Matter of Lupovici v. Sobol

Petitioner states for the first time in his reply brief that the evidence upon which his penalty was based…