Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Rothstein v. Milleridge Inn, Inc.
Citations: 251 A.D.2d 154; 674 N.Y.S.2d 346; 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7304
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; June 18, 1998; New York; State Appellate Court
An order from the Supreme Court, New York County, reversed a previous decision to sever a third-party action in a slip-and-fall case involving plaintiff Karen Rothstein and defendant Milleridge Inn, Inc. The appellate court found that the severance, initiated by the court without a request from any party, was an improper exercise of discretion. The court emphasized that severance is only justified if substantial rights of a party would be prejudiced, which was not demonstrated in this case. Discovery in the primary action was complete, and no party expressed concerns about prejudice from a joint trial. The court highlighted that determining Milleridge's liability for Rothstein's injuries necessitates consideration of Maura Brothers' conduct in removing snow and ice. Therefore, the appellate court ordered the parties to complete all discovery in the third-party action within 90 days and reinstated the joint trial of both the main and third-party actions.