Greenberg v. Feinblatt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Greenberg v. Feinblatt

74 A.D.2d 896, 425 N.Y.S.2d 971, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10693

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

DecidedMarch 24, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 74 A.D.2d 896 (Greenberg v. Feinblatt) 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

Greenberg v. Feinblatt, 74 A.D.2d 896, 425 N.Y.S.2d 971, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10693 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

In a wrongful death action, defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered October 26, 1979, which was in favor of the plaintiffs and against them, upon a jury verdict. Judgment modified, by deleting from the first decretal paragraph thereof, all words beginning with the words "the sum of’ and ending with "$108,212.92”. As so modified, judgment affirmed, with costs to plaintiffs, and case remitted to Trial Term for a new determination of damages and for the entry of an appropriate amended judgment. The findings of fact as to liability are affirmed. The confusion engendered by the parties’ failure to inform the court of the stipulation concerning the ad damnum clause, the ambiguity and confusion of the jury with respect to unpaid bills, and the fact that, under the circumstances, it is not possible for this court to apportion the award between the wrongful death and conscious pain and suffering actions, require this case to be remanded to the trial court for a new trial as to damages. Gibbons, J. P., Rabin, Gulotta and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

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

In a wrongful death action, defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered October 26, 1979, which was in favor of the plaintiffs and against them, upon a jury verdict. Judgment modified, by deleting from the first decretal paragraph thereof, all words beginning with the words "the sum of’ and ending with "$108,212.92”. As so modified, judgment affirmed, with costs to plaintiffs, and case remitted to Trial Term for a new determination of damages and for the entry of an appropriate amended judgment. The findings of fact as to liability are affirmed. The confusion engendered by the parties’ failure to inform the court of the stipulation concerning the ad damnum clause, the ambiguity and confusion of the jury with respect to unpaid bills, and the fact that, under the circumstances, it is not possible for this court to apportion the award between the wrongful death and conscious pain and suffering actions, require this case to be remanded to the trial court for a new trial as to damages. Gibbons, J. P., Rabin, Gulotta and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

74 A.D.2d 896, 425 N.Y.S.2d 971, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10693, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/greenberg-v-feinblatt-nyappdiv-1980.