throbber
FILED: ERIE COUNTY CLERK 04/27/2018 07:48 AM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 127
`COUNTY
`CLERK
`04/26/2018
`FILED
`ERIE
`12:08
`P1
`:
`DOC.
`NO.
`125
`NYSCEF
`
`INDEX NO. 803977/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/27/2018
`803977/2016
`NO.
`INDEX
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`04/26/2018
`
`SUPREME
`COUNTY
`
`COURT
`OF ERIE
`
`JAYME
`
`A. MAST,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`
`OF THE STATE
`
`OF NEW YO1UC
`
`ORDER WITH NOTICE
`
`OF ENTRY
`
`Index
`
`No.
`
`803977/2016
`
`GERARD
`
`A. DESIMONE,
`
`Defendant.
`
`PLEASE
`
`TAKE
`
`NOTICE
`
`that
`
`the within
`
`is a true
`
`copy
`
`of an order
`
`entered
`
`in
`
`the office
`
`of
`
`the Clerk
`
`of
`
`the above
`
`Court
`
`on April
`
`25, 2018.
`
`DATED:
`
`Buffalo,
`April
`
`NY
`26, 2018
`
`etc.,
`Yours,
`Law OfficesofJohn
`
`Trop
`
`By·
`By:
`
`/s/Leah
`
`Costanzo
`Esq.
`LeahCostanzo,
`for Defendant
`Attorney
`Gerard
`A. Desimone
`2201 Main
`Place
`350 Main
`Street
`NY 14202-3750
`842-6053
`Telephone:(716)
`Our
`FileNo.
`0337970677.1-TMS
`
`Tower
`
`Buffalo,
`
`TO:
`
`J. Shemik,
`Esq.
`Nicholas
`LAW FIRM,
`THE DIETRICH
`for Plaintiff
`Attorney
`1323 N Forest
`Rd
`NY 14221
`Williamsville,
`716-839-3939
`
`P.C.
`
`0
`
`

`

`FILED: ERIE COUNTY CLERK 04/27/2018 07:48 AM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 127
`COUNTY
`CLERK
`12
`04 / 2 6/
`2018
`FILED
`ERIE
`: 0 8
`:
`NYSCEF
`DOC.
`NO.
`125
`NYSCEF
`DOC. NO.
`124
`
`P14
`
`INDEX NO. 803977/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/27/2018
`803977/2016
`NO.
`INDEX
`
`RECEIWWE1EYNCEF80027'250M8
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`04/25/2018
`
`Special
`
`At a Civil
`Supreme
`
`Court,
`of Erie,
`County
`286
`day of March
`
`the
`Term of
`the
`in and for
`held
`of New York,
`State
`2018.
`
`on the
`
`PRESIDING:
`
`HON,
`
`PAUL
`
`B. WOJTASZEK,
`
`J.S.C.
`
`SUPREME
`COUNTY
`
`COURT:
`OF ERIE
`
`STATE
`
`OF NEWNEW' YORK
`
`JAYME
`
`A. MAST,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`.
`
`vs.
`
`GERARD
`
`A. DESIMONE,
`
`Defendant.
`
`DECISION
`
`and ORDER
`
`Index
`
`#803977/2016
`
`DECISION
`
`and ORDER
`
`On August
`
`18, 2014
`
`the plaintiff,
`
`Jayme
`
`A. Mast
`
`(hereinafter
`
`the "plaintiff'),
`
`was
`
`injured
`
`when
`
`she was
`
`involved
`
`in a motor
`
`vehicle
`
`accident
`
`involving
`
`the defendant,
`
`Gerard
`
`A. Desimone
`
`(hereinafter
`
`the "defendant.").
`
`As a result
`
`of
`
`this
`
`incident,
`
`an action
`
`seeking
`
`damages
`
`for bodily
`
`injuries
`
`was commenced.
`
`The matter
`
`ultimately
`
`proceeded
`
`to trial
`
`on February
`
`1, 2018,
`
`concluding
`
`on February
`
`13, 2018.
`
`1
`
`1 of
`
`6
`
`

`

`FILED: ERIE COUNTY CLERK 04/27/2018 07:48 AM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 127
`CLERK
`12 : 08
`04 / 26 / 2 018
`COUNTY
`ERIE
`FILED
`PH
`:
`NYSCEF
`DO . NO.
`125
`NYSCEF
`DOC. NO.
`124
`
`INDEX NO. 803977/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/27/2018
`803977/2016
`NO.
`INDEX
`
`RECEI
`RECEIVED
`
`6 Î2018018
`YS EF:Ÿ4/
`NYSCEF:
`04/25/2018
`
`BACKGROUND:
`
`The
`
`plaintiff
`
`alleged
`
`that
`
`the defendant
`
`was
`
`negligent
`
`in the happening
`
`of
`
`the accident
`
`and
`
`that
`
`the accident
`
`resulted
`
`in a "serious
`
`injury"
`
`pursuant
`
`to New York
`
`Insurance
`
`Law 5102(d).
`
`The
`
`plaintiff
`
`claimed
`
`entitlement
`
`to damages
`
`based
`
`upon
`
`the
`
`following
`
`three
`
`"serious
`
`injury"
`
`categories:
`
`Permanent
`
`consequential
`
`limitation
`
`of use of a body
`
`organ
`
`or member;
`
`Significant
`
`limitation
`
`of use of a body
`
`function
`
`or system;
`
`and
`
`•
`
`•
`
`•
`
`A medically
`determined
`injury
`person
`injured
`the
`which
`prevents
`material
`acts which
`constitute
`for
`not
`than
`activities
`less
`
`or
`
`immediately
`(Insurance
`
`following
`Law 5102(d)).
`
`of a non-permanent
`impairment
`from performing
`substantially
`and
`such
`usual
`person's
`daily
`customary
`days
`the one hundred
`days
`ninety
`eighty
`impairment
`the
`the
`or
`occurrence
`
`nature
`the
`all of
`
`during
`of
`
`injury
`
`Extensive
`
`litigation
`
`and motion
`
`practice
`
`was
`
`conducted
`
`in this
`
`action
`
`up to and during
`
`the
`
`time
`
`of
`
`the trial.
`
`The matter
`
`proceeded
`
`to trial,
`
`and on February
`
`13, 2018
`
`after
`
`due
`
`deliberation
`
`the jury
`
`unanimously
`
`found
`
`the
`
`defendant's
`
`negligence
`
`was
`
`a substantial
`
`factor
`
`in causing
`
`the
`
`two
`
`of
`
`injury."
`
`plaintiff
`
`to sustain
`
`categories
`
`"serious
`
`The
`
`jury
`
`found
`
`the
`
`plaintiff
`
`sustained
`
`a
`
`qualifying
`
`injury
`
`under
`
`the
`
`significant
`
`limitation
`
`and
`
`90/I80
`
`categories,
`
`but
`
`notably
`
`the
`
`jury
`
`determined
`
`that
`
`the plaintiff
`
`did
`
`not
`
`sustain
`
`a permanent
`
`consequential
`
`injury
`
`as a result
`
`of
`
`the
`
`accident.
`
`The only monetary
`
`award made
`
`by the jury was
`
`for past pain
`
`and suffering
`
`in the amount
`
`of $120,000.
`
`The jury
`
`verdict
`
`was
`
`reported
`
`to the Court,
`
`and this
`
`concluded
`
`the trial
`
`proceedings.
`
`PROCEDURAL
`
`POSTURE:
`
`The plaintiff
`
`now moves
`
`pursuant
`
`to CPLR 4404(a)
`
`and 5501(c)
`
`for
`
`an Order
`
`setting
`
`aside
`
`the jury
`
`verdict
`
`and increasing
`
`the jury's
`
`award
`
`for both
`
`past and future
`
`pain
`
`and suffering
`
`as well
`
`as future
`
`economic
`
`loss.
`
`Alternatively,
`
`the plaintiff
`
`asks
`
`for
`
`a new trial
`
`on damages
`
`only.
`
`The
`
`plaintiff
`
`argues
`
`that
`
`the verdict
`
`is against
`
`the weight
`
`of
`
`the evidence.
`
`2
`
`2 of
`
`6
`
`

`

`FILED: ERIE COUNTY CLERK 04/27/2018 07:48 AM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 127
`12 : 08
`04 / 2 6 / 2018
`CLERK
`PM
`COUNTY
`ERIE
`FILED
`:
`NO.
`125
`NYSCEF
`DOC.
`NYSCEF
`DOC. NO.
`124
`
`INDEX NO. 803977/2016
`
`803977/2016
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/27/2018
`NO.
`INDEX
`803977/20%
`INDEX
`NO.
`ÈF
`Y
`4/
`NYSCEF:
`04/25/2018
`
`RECEIV
`RECEIVED
`
`8
`
`In support
`
`of her motion,
`
`the
`
`plaintiff
`
`submitted
`
`the Attorney
`
`Affmnation
`
`of Nicholas
`
`J.
`
`Shemik,
`
`Esq. with
`
`attached
`
`exhibits
`
`sworn
`
`to on February
`
`26,
`
`2018
`
`(hereinafter
`
`the
`
`"Shemik
`
`Affirmation").
`
`The
`
`defendant's
`
`opposition
`
`papers
`
`consist
`
`of
`
`the Attorney
`
`Affirmation
`
`of Leah A.
`
`Esq. with
`
`an attached
`
`exhibit
`
`sworn
`
`to on March
`
`I6,
`
`2018
`
`(hereinafter
`
`the
`
`"Costanzo
`
`Costanzo,
`
`Affirmation").
`
`Counsel
`
`for plaintiff
`
`and defendant
`
`personally
`
`appeared
`
`for
`
`oral
`
`argument
`
`on March
`
`28,
`
`2018
`
`in further
`
`support
`
`of
`
`their
`
`respective
`
`positions.
`
`CONCLUSIONS
`
`OF LAW:
`
`This Court
`
`has reviewed
`
`all
`
`submissions,
`
`and heard
`
`oral
`
`argument
`
`of all parties.
`
`A Court
`
`must
`
`and selective
`
`when
`
`its own judgment
`
`for
`
`that
`
`of a jury:
`
`be very methodical
`
`substituting
`
`CPLR § 4404(a).
`
`Post
`
`trial
`
`motion
`
`for
`
`judgment
`
`and
`
`new trial;
`
`or
`
`issue
`of action
`of a cause
`After
`a trial
`required.
`where
`trial
`after
`Motion
`jury
`the
`or on its own
`of any party
`the motion
`upon
`by a jury,
`of
`right
`triable
`initiative,
`that
`a verdict
`or
`judgment
`entered
`thereon
`and
`direct
`aside
`court may
`set
`any
`as a matter
`in favor
`of a party
`entitled
`to judgment
`law or
`it
`be entered
`of
`judgment
`of a cause
`order
`a new trial
`of action
`or separable
`issue where
`the verdict
`is
`the evidence,
`to the weight
`of
`in the interest
`justice
`or where
`the jury
`of
`as is deemed
`the
`kept
`for
`as long
`reasonable
`after
`together
`agree
`by
`added).
`(emphasis
`(CPLR
`
`may
`contrary
`cannot
`court
`
`being
`§ 4404(a))
`
`The law in New York
`
`is very well-settled
`
`when
`
`it comes
`
`to disturbing
`
`jury
`
`verdicts.
`
`Where
`
`a party moves
`
`to set aside
`
`a jury
`
`verdict
`
`as against
`
`the weight
`
`of
`
`the
`
`evidence,
`
`as plaintiff
`
`does
`
`here,
`
`the motion
`
`should
`
`not
`
`be granted
`
`unless
`
`the preponderance
`
`of
`
`the evidence
`
`in the movant's
`
`favor
`
`is so great
`
`that
`
`the verdict
`
`could
`
`not have
`
`been
`
`reached
`
`upon
`
`any
`
`fair
`
`interpretation
`
`of
`
`the
`
`evidence
`
`(Lolik
`
`v. Big V Supermarkets,
`
`86 NY2d
`
`744,
`
`746 [1995j
`
`; Ruddock
`
`v. Happell,
`
`307 AD2d
`
`719,
`
`720,
`
`763 NYS2d
`
`868
`
`[4* Dept
`
`2003])
`
`(internal
`
`citation
`
`omitted).
`
`If
`
`"the
`
`verdict
`
`is one that
`
`3
`
`3 of
`
`6
`
`

`

`FILED: ERIE COUNTY CLERK 04/27/2018 07:48 AM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 127
`0 4 /2
`12 : 0 8
`CLERK
`6 / 2018
`ERIE
`COUNTY
`FILED
`:
`PM|
`NO.
`125
`DOC.
`NYSCEF
`DOC. NO.
`124
`NYSCEF
`
`INDEX NO. 803977/2016
`
`803977/2016
`INDEX
`NO.
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/27/2018
`803977/2016
`1NDEX NO
`Y
`RECEI
`04/26/2018
`RECEIVED
`04/25/2018
`NYSCEF:
`
`reasonable
`
`persons
`
`could
`
`have
`
`rendered
`
`after
`
`receiving
`
`conflicting
`
`evidence,
`
`the court
`
`should
`
`not
`
`substitute
`
`its judgment
`
`for
`
`that
`
`of
`
`the
`
`jury"
`
`(Ruddock,
`
`307 AD2d
`
`at 720).
`
`Whether
`
`a particular
`
`factual
`
`determination
`
`is against
`
`the weight
`
`of
`
`the evidence
`
`is itself
`
`a
`
`factual
`
`question,
`
`and the
`
`question
`
`as to whether
`
`a verdict
`
`is against
`
`the weight
`
`of
`
`the
`
`evidence
`
`"involves
`
`what
`
`is in large
`
`part
`
`a discretionary
`
`balancing
`
`of many
`
`factors"
`
`(Cohen
`
`v. Hallmark
`
`45 NY2d
`
`499
`
`[1978]).
`
`Cards,
`
`493,
`
`498,
`
`The standard
`
`is clear
`
`and seemingly
`
`uncontested
`
`by the parties
`
`here,
`
`and this Court
`
`is very
`
`conscious
`
`of
`
`the importance
`
`of not
`
`invading
`
`the province
`
`of a clear-headed
`
`jury
`
`that has weighed
`
`the
`
`evidence,
`
`listened
`
`intently
`
`to clear
`
`and
`
`agreed
`
`upon
`
`jury
`
`instructions,
`
`deliberated,
`
`and then
`
`reached
`
`a unanimous
`
`verdict
`
`on all questions.
`
`Clearly
`
`it
`
`is within
`
`the
`
`province
`
`of
`
`the jury
`
`to determine
`
`issues
`
`of
`
`credibility,
`
`and
`
`great
`
`deference
`
`should
`
`be given
`
`to the jury
`
`because
`
`it has the opportunity
`
`to see and hear
`
`the witnesses
`
`(see Sauter
`
`v. Calabretta,
`
`103 AD3d
`
`1220,
`
`959 NYS2d
`
`579
`
`[4* Dept
`
`2013]
`
`; Kim v. New York City
`
`Transit
`
`Authority,
`
`87 AD3d
`
`531,
`
`928 NYS2d
`
`315
`
`[2d Dept
`
`2011]).
`
`The
`
`jury
`
`in the present
`
`case
`
`saw and heard
`
`the testimony
`
`from the actors
`
`involved
`
`in the incident
`
`as well
`
`as experts
`
`who
`
`offered
`
`opinion
`
`testimony.
`
`The
`
`jury
`
`assessed
`
`their
`
`respective
`
`credibility,
`
`and
`
`then
`
`unanimously
`
`determined
`
`the case.
`
`Great
`
`deference
`
`should
`
`be given
`
`to this
`
`process
`
`generally,
`
`and
`
`this Court
`
`must
`
`afford
`
`such
`
`deference
`
`in this
`
`case because
`
`did not
`
`in
`
`to the jury
`
`the evidence
`
`so preponderate
`
`favor
`
`ofthe
`
`plaintiff
`
`that
`
`the jury
`
`verdict
`
`could
`
`not have
`
`been
`
`reached
`
`on any
`
`fair
`
`interpretation
`
`the evidence
`
`(see Sauter,
`
`103 AD3d
`
`at 1220).
`
`To invade
`
`the deliberative
`
`process
`
`and province
`
`of
`
`of
`
`the jury
`
`under
`
`the facts
`
`in this
`
`case would
`
`be an abuse
`
`of discretionary
`
`power.
`
`Plaintiff
`
`argues
`
`that
`
`the jury
`
`determination
`
`with
`
`respect
`
`to past
`
`pain
`
`and suffering,
`
`future
`
`pain
`
`and suffering,
`
`and
`
`future
`
`economic
`
`loss
`
`deviates
`
`materially
`
`from reasonable
`
`compensation
`
`4
`
`4 of
`
`6
`
`

`

`FILED: ERIE COUNTY CLERK 04/27/2018 07:48 AM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 127
`ERIE
`COUNTY
`CLERK
`0 4 / 26 / 2018
`FILED
`12 : 0 8
`:
`NYSCEF
`DOC.
`NO.
`125
`NYSCEF
`DOC. NO.
`124
`~
`
`PM)
`
`INDEX NO. 803977/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/27/2018
`INDEX
`NO.
`803977/2016
`E§ypgp§0Wfyg20
`
`pig
`
`RECEI
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`04/25/2018
`
`due to, among
`
`other
`
`arguments,
`
`the trial
`
`testimony
`
`of Dr. Fishkin,
`
`Dr.
`
`Landi,
`
`Robert
`
`Tremp,
`
`Dr.
`
`Lichtenstein,
`
`and the plaintiff
`
`herself.
`
`In succinct
`
`terms,
`
`the plaintiff
`
`argues
`
`that
`
`her evidence
`
`in
`
`the form of
`
`"testimony
`
`and
`
`documentary
`
`proof
`
`was
`
`in complete
`
`and
`
`absolute
`
`agreement
`
`on all
`
`issues
`
`regarding
`
`[plaintifPs]
`
`injuries,
`
`their
`
`causation,
`
`and
`
`their
`
`severity"
`
`(Shemik
`
`Affirmation,
`
`¶23).
`
`Specifically,
`
`that plaintiff
`
`suffered
`
`a permanent
`
`L5-S1
`
`fusion
`
`secondary
`
`to a herniated
`
`disc
`
`be limited
`
`$23).
`
`and that her work-life
`
`expectancy
`
`will
`
`by 50% (Shemik
`
`Affirmation,
`
`However,
`
`when
`
`questioned
`
`during
`
`oral
`
`argument
`
`in support
`
`of
`
`this motion,
`
`plaintiffs
`
`counsel
`
`conceded
`
`that
`
`there was,
`
`in fact,
`
`conflicting
`
`proof
`
`regarding
`
`the likelihood,
`
`severity,
`
`and
`
`causation
`
`of plaintiff
`
`s alleged
`
`future
`
`pain
`
`and suffering
`
`(see Melnick
`
`v. Chase,
`
`148 AD3d
`
`1589,
`
`1590 [45 Dept
`
`2017])
`
`(holding
`
`that ajury
`
`verdict
`
`regarding
`
`future
`
`damages
`
`should
`
`not be disturbed
`
`as against
`
`the weight
`
`of
`
`the evidence
`
`where
`
`there
`
`is conflicting
`
`proof
`
`concerning
`
`the likelihood,
`
`severity,
`
`and causation
`
`of alleged
`
`future
`
`pain
`
`and suffering).
`
`The jury
`
`in this
`
`case
`
`heard
`
`extensive
`
`proof
`
`from both
`
`parties
`
`as to all
`
`issues
`
`in dispute.
`
`Once
`
`deliberations
`
`began,
`
`the jury
`
`among
`
`other
`
`things
`
`asked
`
`the Court
`
`to read
`
`back
`
`the entire
`
`trial
`
`testimony
`
`of both
`
`the plaintiff
`
`as well
`
`as the defendant's
`
`examining
`
`physician,
`
`Dr.
`
`Landi.
`
`During
`
`deliberations
`
`the jury
`
`also
`
`asked
`
`to review
`
`the plaintiff
`
`s primary
`
`care records
`
`created
`
`in the days
`
`immediately
`
`after
`
`the
`
`accident
`
`- a key
`
`timeframe
`
`in this
`
`case
`
`because
`
`part
`
`of
`
`the
`
`defendant's
`
`that
`
`lower
`
`became
`
`the
`
`focus
`
`of
`
`argument
`
`against
`
`damages
`
`was
`
`the
`
`back
`
`injury
`
`that
`
`primary
`
`plaintiffs
`
`allegations
`
`was not
`
`a body
`
`part
`
`she complained
`
`of
`
`immediately
`
`after
`
`the accident.
`
`The jury
`
`deliberations
`
`lasted
`
`over
`
`the course
`
`of
`
`two
`
`days,
`
`and the verdict
`
`was
`
`ultimately
`
`unanimous.
`
`As stated
`
`earlier,
`
`it
`
`is within
`
`the province
`
`ofthe
`
`jury
`
`to determine
`
`issues
`
`of credibility,
`
`and great
`
`deference
`
`should
`
`be given
`
`to the jury
`
`because
`
`it has the opportunity
`
`to see and hear
`
`the
`
`witnesses
`
`(see Sauter
`
`v. Calabretta,
`
`103 AD3d
`
`1220,
`
`959 NYS2d
`
`579 [45 Dept
`
`2013]
`
`; 10m v. New
`
`5
`
`5 of
`
`6
`
`

`

`FILED: ERIE COUNTY CLERK 04/27/2018 07:48 AM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 127
`CLERK
`FILED
`ERIE
`COUNTY
`04 / 26 / 2018
`12
`P1
`:
`: 0 8
`%%6
`OCNONO 2
`NY
`
`124
`
`INDEX NO. 803977/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/27/2018
`x
`O.803977/2016
`
`NYSCEF:NYSCEF:
`04/26/2018
`04/26/2018
`N SCE :
`04/25/2018
`
`RECEIVEDRECEIVED
`
`RECEIVED
`RECEIVED
`
`York City
`
`Transit
`
`Authority,
`
`87 AD3d
`
`531,
`
`928.NYS2d
`
`315
`
`[2d Dept
`
`2D11]).
`
`The
`
`credibility
`
`of
`
`the witnesses,
`
`the truthfulness
`
`and accuracy
`
`ofthe
`
`testimony,
`
`whether
`
`contradicted
`
`or not,
`
`andthe
`
`significance
`
`of weaknesses
`
`and
`
`discrepancies
`
`are all
`
`issues
`
`for
`
`the
`
`trier
`
`of
`
`the
`
`facts
`
`(Sorokin
`
`v.
`
`Food
`
`Fair
`
`Stores,
`
`Inc.,
`
`51 Ad2d
`
`592
`
`[2d Dept
`
`1976]).
`
`Conflicting
`
`medical
`
`expert
`
`testimony
`
`raises
`
`credibilityissues
`
`for
`
`thejury
`
`to determine,
`
`that
`
`is exactly
`
`what
`
`occurred
`
`in the
`
`trial
`
`of
`
`this.matter
`
`(see Campo
`
`v. Neary,
`
`52 AD3d
`
`1194
`
`and
`
`[45
`
`of
`
`this
`
`clear
`
`review
`
`of
`
`the extensive
`
`proof
`
`presented
`
`to
`
`Dept
`
`2008]).
`
`In light
`
`standard,
`
`and upon
`
`the jury
`
`for
`
`its consideration.
`
`the
`
`plaintiff
`
`has failed
`
`to demonstrate.the
`
`jury
`
`verdict
`
`was
`
`against
`
`the weight
`
`of
`
`the evidence.
`
`As
`
`such.
`
`the plaintiff
`~'
`
`has
`
`failed
`
`to raise
`
`an issue
`
`on this motion
`
`that would
`
`obligate
`
`this
`
`Court
`
`to set.aside
`
`the jury
`
`verdict,
`
`increase
`
`the jury's
`
`award,:and/or
`
`order
`
`a new trial.
`
`Accordingly,
`
`it
`
`is hereby:
`
`ORDERED,
`
`thatthe
`
`plaintifis
`
`motion
`
`is denied
`
`in itsentirety,
`
`and it
`
`is further
`
`ORDERED,
`
`that
`
`this
`
`shall
`
`constitute
`
`the Decision
`
`and Order
`
`of
`
`the Court
`
`Thedelivery
`
`of
`
`a copy
`
`of
`
`this Decision.and
`
`Order
`
`by this Court
`
`shall
`
`not c
`
`e notice
`
`ofentry.
`
`DATED:
`
`Buffalo,
`
`New York
`
`April
`
`pe'
`__,
`
`2018
`
`/'
`B. 4 JTASZEK
`PAUL
`HON.
`.JTASZEK
`ofthe
`Supreme
`Court
`Justice
`
`6
`
`6 of
`
`6
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket