AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

LYNNE KOPLICK, ETC., et al., appellants, v. ROY LIEBERMAN, ETC., respondent.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the motion is denied, the complaint is reinstated, and a new trial is granted, with costs to abide the event.

The defendant did not object to the admissibility of the testimony of the plaintiffs' expert until after that testimony was completed and the plaintiffs had rested. Where no timely objection is made, the testimony offered is presumed to have been unobjectionable, and any alleged error considered waived (see, Horton v. Smith, 51 N.Y.2d 798 ; see also,CPLR 4017). Consequently, since the trial court dismissed the plaintiffs' case based on its improper determination that the expert's testimony could not be considered by the jury despite the waiver by the defendant, a new trial is granted.

KRAUSMAN, J.P., H. MILLER, SCHMIDT, and SMITH, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

KOPLICK v. LIEBERMAN
(Mar 30, 2000)