From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Addesso v. Belting Associates, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 2, 1987
128 A.D.2d 489 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Summary

In Addesso v. Belting Associates, 128 A.D.2d 489, 512 N.Y.S.2d 416 (App.Div. 1987), which involved a two-car accident, plaintiff had minimal recollection of the incident and therefore could not render an accurate estimation of the speed at which the defendant was traveling when the accident occurred.

Summary of this case from Diodato v. Rogers

Opinion

March 2, 1987

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roncallo, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, and the motion is granted.

Generally, questions of liability and damages in an action sounding in negligence represent distinct and severable issues which should be tried and determined separately (see, CPLR 603; Mercado v. City of New York, 25 A.D.2d 75). However, separate trials with respect to these issues should not be conducted where the nature of the injuries has an important bearing on the question of liability (see, Culley v. City of New York, 25 A.D.2d 519; Castelli v. Regina Center, 54 A.D.2d 594; Schwartz v Binder, 91 A.D.2d 660).

The plaintiff in the instant case had minimal recollection of the accident, and was therefore unable to render an accurate estimation regarding the speed at which the defendant John Y. Bischoff, Jr., operated the vehicle owned by the defendant Belting Associates, Inc. The defendant, however, claimed that he was only traveling at approximately 20 miles per hour at the time of the accident. In order for the plaintiff to sustain his burden of proof and to rebut the defendants' assertions, it will be necessary to introduce evidence concerning the nature and extent of his injuries. The introduction of these facts into evidence will enable the jury to consider and evaluate the force of the impact and arrive at an approximation of the rate of speed of the defendants' vehicle.

Because the extent of the injuries is, under the circumstances, inextricably intertwined with the question of liability, Special Term should have ordered a combined trial of all issues rather than a bifurcated trial (see, Roman v. McNulty, 99 A.D.2d 544; Costa v. Hicks, 98 A.D.2d 137). Thompson, J.P., Niehoff, Weinstein and Eiber, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Addesso v. Belting Associates, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 2, 1987
128 A.D.2d 489 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

In Addesso v. Belting Associates, 128 A.D.2d 489, 512 N.Y.S.2d 416 (App.Div. 1987), which involved a two-car accident, plaintiff had minimal recollection of the incident and therefore could not render an accurate estimation of the speed at which the defendant was traveling when the accident occurred.

Summary of this case from Diodato v. Rogers
Case details for

Addesso v. Belting Associates, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH ADDESSO, Appellant, v. BELTING ASSOCIATES, INC., et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Mar 2, 1987

Citations

128 A.D.2d 489 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

Vazquez v. Costco Companies, Inc.

We also agree with the plaintiff's contention that a unified, as opposed to a bifurcated, trial was warranted…

Tate v. Stevens

Each party contends that the other ran a red light. Plaintiff contends that evidence of his injuries is…