Giglio v. Pignataro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Giglio v. Pignataro

54 A.D.2d 556, 387 N.Y.S.2d 9, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13869

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 20, 1976·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendants appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rock-land County, dated November 3, 1975, as granted plaintiff’s motion to set aside the jury verdict of $5,000 as inadequate, and directed a new trial unless defendants stipulated to the entry of judgment against them in the amount of $17,500. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Plaintiff, who was 23 years old at the time of the automobile accident, sustained a permanent facial disfigurement, consisting of a bulge in the center of a six-inch scar on the forehead. His special damages were approximately $2,800. In our view the jury verdict of $5,000 was so grossly inadequate as to enable the Trial Judge, who viewed and evaluated the afore-mentioned scar, to conclude that such verdict shocked the conscience of the court. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Latham, Cohalan and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendants appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Rock-land County, dated November 3, 1975, as granted plaintiff’s motion to set aside the jury verdict of $5,000 as inadequate, and directed a new trial unless defendants stipulated to the entry of judgment against them in the amount of $17,500. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Plaintiff, who was 23 years old at the time of the automobile accident, sustained a permanent facial disfigurement, consisting of a bulge in the center of a six-inch scar on the forehead. His special damages were approximately $2,800. In our view the jury verdict of $5,000 was so grossly inadequate as to enable the Trial Judge, who viewed and evaluated the afore-mentioned scar, to conclude that such verdict shocked the conscience of the court. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Latham, Cohalan and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Giglio v. Pignataro, 54 A.D.2d 556, 387 N.Y.S.2d 9, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13869 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

54 A.D.2d 556 (Giglio v. Pignataro) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related