Opinion
March 26, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Lowe, III, J.).
The trial court properly excluded plaintiff's photographs, offered to show water damages to plaintiff's premises resulting from specific incidents, on the ground that plaintiff's witnesses were unable to state when the photographs were taken ( see, Melendez v. New York City Tr. Auth., 196 A.D.2d 460). While it was error to exclude plaintiff's expert's testimony absent a pretrial request by defendant for the identity of the expert ( see, Collins v. Greater N.Y. Sav. Bank, 194 A.D.2d 514), the error was harmless since the issue of monetary damages, as to which the expert would have testified, was rendered academic by the jury's finding that defendant did not violate the lease by failing to provide heat, hot water and air conditioning. We have considered plaintiff's remaining points and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Lerner, P. J., Milonas, Rosenberger, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.