Alexander v. Santoro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Alexander v. Santoro

217 A.D.2d 642, 630 N.Y.S.2d 241

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJuly 24, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 217 A.D.2d 642 (Alexander v. Santoro) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alexander v. Santoro, 217 A.D.2d 642, 630 N.Y.S.2d 241 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Owen, J.), dated June 21, 1993, which upon granting the plaintiffs’ motion to set aside, as inadequate, the jury verdict on damages, directed a new trial on damages unless the defendants stipulated to increase the damages awarded to the plaintiff Patricia C. Alexander for future pain and suffering from $0 to $50,000, and the damages awarded to Charles J. Alexander from $0 to $1,500.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

[643]*643The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action (see, Matter of Aho, 39 NY2d 241, 248). The issues raised on appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see, CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).

A judgment was entered in this action on September 23, 1993 (see, Alexander v Santoro, 217 AD2d 642 [decided herewith]). Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Owen, J.), dated June 21, 1993, which upon granting the plaintiffs’ motion to set aside, as inadequate, the jury verdict on damages, directed a new trial on damages unless the defendants stipulated to increase the damages awarded to the plaintiff Patricia C. Alexander for future pain and suffering from $0 to $50,000, and the damages awarded to Charles J. Alexander from $0 to $1,500.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

[643]*643The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action (see, Matter of Aho, 39 NY2d 241, 248). The issues raised on appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see, CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).

A judgment was entered in this action on September 23, 1993 (see, Alexander v Santoro, 217 AD2d 642 [decided herewith]). Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

217 A.D.2d 642, 630 N.Y.S.2d 241, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alexander-v-santoro-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack