Chasis v. Progressive Electronics, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Chasis v. Progressive Electronics, Inc.

15 A.D.2d 776, 224 N.Y.S.2d 771, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11213

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

DecidedFebruary 27, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 15 A.D.2d 776 (Chasis v. Progressive Electronics, Inc.) 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

Chasis v. Progressive Electronics, Inc., 15 A.D.2d 776, 224 N.Y.S.2d 771, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11213 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

In this personal injury negligence action, on this record, the verdict is excessive. There was considerable conflict in the medical testimony with respect to injuries and the consequences thereof, and it would seem that a new trial would be a more just solution than an effort to adjust the damages to the sharply divergent possibilities that are presented. The part of the said judgment in favor of plaintiff Barbara Parker Chasis in the sum of $2,000 is reversed, on the law and on the facts, the verdict vacated, and a new trial granted, without costs, unless said plaintiff stipulates to accept $400 in lieu of the award by verdict, in which event the judgment is modified to that extent, and is affirmed as thus modified, without costs. It is evident that the jury verdict is excessive in its award of damages, and that a verdict in excess of $400 is not warranted by the record. Settle order on notice. Concur—■ Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Valente and McNally, JJ.

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

In this personal injury negligence action, on this record, the verdict is excessive. There was considerable conflict in the medical testimony with respect to injuries and the consequences thereof, and it would seem that a new trial would be a more just solution than an effort to adjust the damages to the sharply divergent possibilities that are presented. The part of the said judgment in favor of plaintiff Barbara Parker Chasis in the sum of $2,000 is reversed, on the law and on the facts, the verdict vacated, and a new trial granted, without costs, unless said plaintiff stipulates to accept $400 in lieu of the award by verdict, in which event the judgment is modified to that extent, and is affirmed as thus modified, without costs. It is evident that the jury verdict is excessive in its award of damages, and that a verdict in excess of $400 is not warranted by the record. Settle order on notice. Concur—■ Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Valente and McNally, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

15 A.D.2d 776, 224 N.Y.S.2d 771, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11213, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chasis-v-progressive-electronics-inc-nyappdiv-1962.