Hedgepeth v. Merz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hedgepeth v. Merz

131 A.D.2d 955, 516 N.Y.S.2d 539, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48367

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

DecidedJune 11, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 131 A.D.2d 955 (Hedgepeth v. Merz) 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

Hedgepeth v. Merz, 131 A.D.2d 955, 516 N.Y.S.2d 539, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48367 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinions

Casey, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Fischer, J.), entered July 25, 1986 in Broome County, which granted defendant’s motion to set aside a verdict rendered in favor of plaintiff, and granted a new trial unless plaintiff stipulates to a reduced verdict.

[956]*956Since defendant has not appealed, the only issue to be decided is whether Supreme Court erred in setting aside the verdict in favor of plaintiff unless plaintiff stipulates to accept a reduction in the amount of the verdict from $150,000 to $80,000. Plaintiff presented expert proof that he had suffered psychic and emotional damage which affected his ability to enter into and maintain intimate relationships. One of the experts testified that "[t]o some extent the damage is permanent”, and he opined that future therapy for plaintiff would cost some $6,000 per year for the first two to four years and $2,000 to $2,500 per year thereafter. The record, however, established that therapy had cost plaintiff $700 to the date of trial, and that plaintiff has been productively employed, has been attending school and has entered into an intimate relationship with another woman. The record as a whole supports Supreme Court’s decision and its order should be affirmed.

Order affirmed, with costs. Main, J. P., Casey and Yesawich, Jr., JJ., concur.

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

Casey, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Fischer, J.), entered July 25, 1986 in Broome County, which granted defendant’s motion to set aside a verdict rendered in favor of plaintiff, and granted a new trial unless plaintiff stipulates to a reduced verdict.

[956]*956Since defendant has not appealed, the only issue to be decided is whether Supreme Court erred in setting aside the verdict in favor of plaintiff unless plaintiff stipulates to accept a reduction in the amount of the verdict from $150,000 to $80,000. Plaintiff presented expert proof that he had suffered psychic and emotional damage which affected his ability to enter into and maintain intimate relationships. One of the experts testified that "[t]o some extent the damage is permanent”, and he opined that future therapy for plaintiff would cost some $6,000 per year for the first two to four years and $2,000 to $2,500 per year thereafter. The record, however, established that therapy had cost plaintiff $700 to the date of trial, and that plaintiff has been productively employed, has been attending school and has entered into an intimate relationship with another woman. The record as a whole supports Supreme Court’s decision and its order should be affirmed.

Order affirmed, with costs. Main, J. P., Casey and Yesawich, Jr., JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

131 A.D.2d 955, 516 N.Y.S.2d 539, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48367, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hedgepeth-v-merz-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack