Defendants argue that plaintiff's theory that his injuries were caused by hypoxia ischemia brought about by intercranial pressure should not be considered, because it was improperly raised for the first time in opposition to their motion. We find that the theory was sufficiently pleaded in the bill of particulars to avoid surprise and prejudice to defendants (compare e.g. Valenti v Camins,
Let's get started

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.