Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998

Holtz v. Aldridge

Holtz v. Aldridge
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided December 31, 1998
256 A.D.2d 1198; 683 N.Y.S.2d 451
Holtz v. Aldridge

Opinion of the Court

—Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Plaintiffs sole contention on appeal is that various remarks by defense counsel in summation were so unfair and prejudicial as to require a new trial. Plaintiff failed to move for a mistrial until after the jury rendered its verdict, and thus the motion was untimely (see, Taylor v Dayton Suregrip & Shore Co., 64 AD2d 809, 810). Although the remarks by defense counsel were improper, plaintiffs objections to those remarks were sustained *1199by Supreme Court, which immediately gave curative instructions. (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Flaherty, J. — Negligence.) Present — Denman, P. J., Hayes, Pigott, Jr., Callahan and Fallon, JJ.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.