Majority
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County
It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this negligence action seeking damages for injuries that he allegedly sustained when he was riding his bicycle and was involved in an accident with a vehicle operated by defendant. Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in granting defendant’s motion to bifurcate the trial. “As a general rule, issues of liability and damages in a negligence action are distinct and severable issues which should be tried separately” (Turnmire v Concrete Applied Tech. Corp., 56 AD3d 1125 , 1128 [4th Dept 2008] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Contrary to plaintiff’s contention, he failed to establish that bifurcation would not “assist in a clarification or simplification of issues and a fair and more expeditious resolution of the action” (22 NYCRR 202.42 [a]; see Piccione v Trimain Dev., 5 AD3d 1086 , 1087 [4th Dept 2004]; cf. Mazur v Mazur, 288 AD2d 945 , 945-946 [4th Dept 2001]).
Present— Whalen, P.J., Centra, Peradotto, Lindley and Winslow, JJ.
Cases cited
- Piccione v. Tri-main Development, L.P. 5 AD3d 1086 at 1087 p. 1492