Cedano v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cedano v. City of New York

93 A.D.3d 441, 939 N.Y.S.2d 430

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

DecidedMarch 6, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 93 A.D.3d 441 (Cedano v. City of New York) 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

Cedano v. City of New York, 93 A.D.3d 441, 939 N.Y.S.2d 430 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

[442]*442Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alexander W. Hunter, Jr., J.), entered September 3, 2010, after a jury trial, awarding plaintiff damages in the principal amounts of $250,000 for past pain and suffering, and $300,000 for future pain and suffering over 20.9 years, plus interest, costs and disbursements, and bringing up for review an order, same court and Justice, entered May 7, 2009, which denied defendant City’s post-trial motion for judgment or, in the alternative, to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff presented a prima facie case of negligence by the City. Based on trial testimony, the jury could reasonably have concluded that the City, not some other entity, had paved the roadway around the manhole covers, leaving it in a dangerous condition and causing plaintiffs injury (see Welch v Riverbay Corp., 273 AD2d 66 [2000]). Further, plaintiff established that the City’s negligence proximately caused his accident, as he consistently testified that he fell because of the height difference between the street and the manhole cover (see Vitanza v Growth Realties, 91 AD2d 917 [1983]).

The jury’s award of $250,000 for past pain and suffering and $300,000 for future pain and suffering does not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation under the circumstances. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Acosta, Freedman and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

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

[442]*442Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alexander W. Hunter, Jr., J.), entered September 3, 2010, after a jury trial, awarding plaintiff damages in the principal amounts of $250,000 for past pain and suffering, and $300,000 for future pain and suffering over 20.9 years, plus interest, costs and disbursements, and bringing up for review an order, same court and Justice, entered May 7, 2009, which denied defendant City’s post-trial motion for judgment or, in the alternative, to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff presented a prima facie case of negligence by the City. Based on trial testimony, the jury could reasonably have concluded that the City, not some other entity, had paved the roadway around the manhole covers, leaving it in a dangerous condition and causing plaintiffs injury (see Welch v Riverbay Corp., 273 AD2d 66 [2000]). Further, plaintiff established that the City’s negligence proximately caused his accident, as he consistently testified that he fell because of the height difference between the street and the manhole cover (see Vitanza v Growth Realties, 91 AD2d 917 [1983]).

The jury’s award of $250,000 for past pain and suffering and $300,000 for future pain and suffering does not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation under the circumstances. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Acosta, Freedman and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

93 A.D.3d 441, 939 N.Y.S.2d 430, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cedano-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack