Gonzalez v. Rosenberg

247 A.D.2d 337, 669 N.Y.S.2d 216, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1827
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 26, 1998
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 247 A.D.2d 337 (Gonzalez v. Rosenberg) 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
Gonzalez v. Rosenberg, 247 A.D.2d 337, 669 N.Y.S.2d 216, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1827 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered November 18, 1996, awarding plaintiff Samuel Gonzalez damages structured pursuant to CPLR article 50-B, based upon inter alia, jury awards of $750,000 for past pain and suffering and $750,000 for future pain and suffering and awarding plaintiff Mirna Gonzalez, pursuant to a reduction by the trial court, $75,000 for past loss of services and $50,000 for future loss of services, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff Samuel Gonzalez’s herniated disk at L4-L5 was the subject of two unsuccessful laminectomies and a myelogram, and a recommendation for a third surgery, and caused plaintiff considerable pain and debilitation. The trial court properly refused to reduce the jury’s award for past pain and suffering since it did not deviate materially from what is reasonable compensation under the circumstances (see, Skow v Jones, Lang & Wooton Corp., 240 AD2d 194). Considering the substantial and permanent limitations on plaintiffs once active life, the pain he will continue to endure and the emotional trauma he will suffer, the award of $750,000 for future pain and suffering was properly left intact (see, Faniel v Marriott Corp., 204 AD2d 191). The award for past and future loss of services, as reduced by the trial court, is supported by the rec[338]*338ord.

Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Nardelli, Wallach, Rubin and Tom, JJ.

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

Related

Mejia v. Japan Socy., Inc.
2025 NY Slip Op 50119(U) (New York Supreme Court, Bronx County, 2025)
Dacaj v. New York City Tr. Auth.
2019 NY Slip Op 2171 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Fabiano v. State of New York
2019 NY Slip Op 1696 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Williams v. City of New York
105 A.D.3d 667 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Huff v. Rodriguez
45 A.D.3d 1430 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Cruz v. Long Island Rail Road
17 A.D.3d 397 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Bean v. CSX Transportation
289 F. Supp. 2d 277 (N.D. New York, 2003)
Donlon v. City of New York
284 A.D.2d 13 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Sookraj v. Schindler Elevator Corp.
279 A.D.2d 371 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Rountree v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority
261 A.D.2d 324 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
247 A.D.2d 337, 669 N.Y.S.2d 216, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1827, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gonzalez-v-rosenberg-nyappdiv-1998.