Johnson v. Lazarowitz
| Decision Date | 02 February 2004 |
| Docket Number | 2002-07517. |
| Citation | 4 A.D.3d 334,2004 NY Slip Op 00499,771 N.Y.S.2d 534 |
| Parties | THEODORE JOHNSON et al., Plaintiffs, and GOSLYN SYLVAN, Respondent, v. BARBARA LAZAROWITZ et al., Appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law and in the interest of justice, and a new trial is granted on the issue of damages, with costs to abide the event.
The accident in this case occurred on August 12, 1995. The weight of the evidence established that, toward the end of 1995 or the beginning of 1996, the back and neck pain attributed to the accident by the plaintiff Goslyn Sylvan (hereinafter the plaintiff) had significantly diminished. In March 1996 the plaintiff's chiropractic treatments were suspended, and for several years the plaintiff sought no further treatment in connection with the injuries allegedly incurred in the accident.
In 1999, approximately four years after the accident, the plaintiff began to experience progressively worsening pain in his neck, as well as occasional pain radiating to his hands and feet. He was also having difficulty walking. Approximately one year after the onset of these more serious symptoms, the plaintiff was admitted to University Hospital in Brooklyn, where he underwent neck surgery in July 2000. The jury in this case was called upon to resolve a very close issue as to whether the significant degeneration of the plaintiff's condition in 1999 was due solely, or even partially, to the trauma suffered in the car accident four years earlier. In light of the close issue of causation at the heart of his case, a new trial on the issue of damages is warranted in the interest of justice based on the repeated misconduct of the plaintiff's trial attorney.
The record on appeal is replete with vituperative remarks made by the plaintiff's attorney for the sole purpose of inducing the jury to decide this case on passion rather than on the basis of the evidence. We will make no attempt to catalog counsel's more egregious remarks only for fear that a failure to mention other less egregious ones will be construed as approving their repetition at the new trial. We will instead merely repeat that "when counsel in a close case resort to [inflammatory] practices to win a verdict, they imperil the very verdict which they thus seek" (Cherry Creek Natl. Bank v Fidelity & Cas....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Morales v. City of N.Y.
...106 A.D.3d at 714, 964 N.Y.S.2d 255 ; Lawson v. Aspen Ford, Inc., 15 A.D.3d at 630, 791 N.Y.S.2d 119 ; Ifraimov v. Phoenix Indus. Gas, 4 A.D.3d at 334, 772 N.Y.S.2d 78 ; Favish v. Tepler, 294 A.D.2d 396, 741 N.Y.S.2d 910 ; cf. DiDomenico v. C & S Aeromatik Supplies, 252 A.D.2d 41, 53, 682 N......
-
Betancourt v. Trump Empire State Partners, 2007 NY Slip Op 31677(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 6/1/2007)
...probably would have been attributed to excessive zeal and forgiven as harmless" (Steidel, 182 A.D.2d 809, 814; see also, Johnson v. Lazarowitz, 4 A.D.3d 334, 335 [2004]). In Cherry Creek (id.) the court noted that the "law is so intent that misleading prejudicial matter shall not be allowed......
-
Bonczar v. Am. Multi-Cinema
... ... conduct cause the jury to render its decision based on ... passion rather than proof." (See, Johnson v ... Lazorowitz. 4 A.D.3d 334). It bears noting that a great ... deal of defense counsel's objectionable conduct took ... place outside the ... ...
-
King v. Nonez
...as it is not pled in the bills of particulars. See Ciriello v. Virgues, 156 A.D.2d 417 (2d Dept. 1989); see also Johnson v. Lazarowitz, 4 A.D.3d 334, 335 (2d Dept. 2004) (plaintiff's wife could not testify about need to hire contractors to do work that, but for injuries, plaintiff would hav......
-
Summation
...plaintif ’s counsel during summation that the defendant may have been insured is improper and warrants reversal. Johnson v. Lazarowitz , 4 A.D.3d 334, 771 N.Y.S.2d 534 (2d Dept. 2004). In action for personal injuries sustained in car accident, a new trial on the issue of damages was warrant......
-
Summation
...plaintif ’s counsel during summation that the defendant may have been insured is improper and warrants reversal. Johnson v. Lazarowitz , 4 A.D.3d 334, 771 N.Y.S.2d 534 (2d Dept. 2004). In action for personal injuries sustained in car accident, a new trial on the issue of damages was warrant......
-
Summation
...plaintiff ’s counsel during summation that the defendant may have been insured is improper and warrants reversal. Johnson v. Lazarowitz , 4 A.D.3d 334, 771 N.Y.S.2d 534 (2d Dept. 2004). In action for personal injuries sustained in car accident, a new trial on the issue of damages was warran......
-
Summation
...plaintiff’s counsel during summation that the defendant may have been insured is improper and warrants reversal. Johnson v. Lazarowitz , 4 A.D.3d 334, 771 N.Y.S.2d 534 (2d Dept. 2004). In action for personal injuries sustained in car accident, a new trial on the issue of damages was warrant......