Colao v. Brightwater Towers, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Colao v. Brightwater Towers, Inc.

88 A.D.2d 580, 449 N.Y.S.2d 801, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16743

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

DecidedMay 3, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 88 A.D.2d 580 (Colao v. Brightwater Towers, 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

Colao v. Brightwater Towers, Inc., 88 A.D.2d 580, 449 N.Y.S.2d 801, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16743 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a personal injury action, the third-party defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Composto, J.), dated April 2, 1981, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff’s motion to set aside a jury verdict in his favor of $100,000 as inadequate and ordered a new trial on the question of damages, unless the third-party defendant agreed to pay $200,000. Order reversed, without costs or disbursements, motion to set aside verdict denied, and the verdict is reinstated. The record here discloses a rational basis for the jury’s verdict of $67,000 for the plaintiff’s loss of earnings due to the leg injury, which was the only injury he was found to have sustained. The award of $33,000 for pain and suffering was solely and properly within the province of the jury to make and should not be disturbed (see Juiditta v Bethlehem Steel Corp., 75 AD2d 126, 138; James v Shanley, 73 AD2d 752). Mangano, J. P., Gulotta, O’Connor and Bracken, JJ., concur.

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

— In a personal injury action, the third-party defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Composto, J.), dated April 2, 1981, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff’s motion to set aside a jury verdict in his favor of $100,000 as inadequate and ordered a new trial on the question of damages, unless the third-party defendant agreed to pay $200,000. Order reversed, without costs or disbursements, motion to set aside verdict denied, and the verdict is reinstated. The record here discloses a rational basis for the jury’s verdict of $67,000 for the plaintiff’s loss of earnings due to the leg injury, which was the only injury he was found to have sustained. The award of $33,000 for pain and suffering was solely and properly within the province of the jury to make and should not be disturbed (see Juiditta v Bethlehem Steel Corp., 75 AD2d 126, 138; James v Shanley, 73 AD2d 752). Mangano, J. P., Gulotta, O’Connor and Bracken, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

88 A.D.2d 580, 449 N.Y.S.2d 801, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16743, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/colao-v-brightwater-towers-inc-nyappdiv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack