CUTSOGEORGE v. HERTZ CORPORATION

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

As a general rule, questions of liability and damages in a negligence action represent distinct and severable issues which should be tried and determined separately ( see, CPLR 603; Rothbard v. Woolworth Co., 233 A.D.2d 434; Martinez v. Town of Babylon, 191 A.D.2d 483; Armstrong v. Adelman Automotive Parts Distrib. Corp., 176 A.D.2d 773; see also, 22 NYCRR 202.42). It is only where the nature of the injuries sustained has an important bearing on the issue of liability that a joint trial on both issues is permitted ( see, Dulin v. Maher, 200 A.D.2d 707; Amato v. Hudson County Montessori School, 185 A.D.2d 803). Here, the plaintiff failed to show a need to introduce evidence of the injuries he suffered in order to establish liability. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied his application for a unified trial ( see, Dulin v. Maher, supra).

Bracken, J.P., O'Brien, Santucci, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.