Izzo v. Dunn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Izzo v. Dunn

266 A.D.2d 512, 698 N.Y.S.2d 553, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12237

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

DecidedNovember 29, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 266 A.D.2d 512 (Izzo v. Dunn) 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

Izzo v. Dunn, 266 A.D.2d 512, 698 N.Y.S.2d 553, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12237 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Maestro, J.), dated September 30, 1998, as, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiff Charlene Izzo in the principal sum of $175,000 for past and future pain and suffering.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

On the facts presented, the award of damages to the plaintiff Charlene Izzo for past and future pain and suffering did not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation (see, CPLR 5501 [c]; Nussbaum v Gibstein, 73 NY2d 912; Gaetan v New York City Tr. Auth., 213 AD2d 510).

The defendants’ remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Ritter, J. P., Mc-Ginity, H. Miller and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Maestro, J.), dated September 30, 1998, as, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiff Charlene Izzo in the principal sum of $175,000 for past and future pain and suffering.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

On the facts presented, the award of damages to the plaintiff Charlene Izzo for past and future pain and suffering did not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation (see, CPLR 5501 [c]; Nussbaum v Gibstein, 73 NY2d 912; Gaetan v New York City Tr. Auth., 213 AD2d 510).

The defendants’ remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Ritter, J. P., Mc-Ginity, H. Miller and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

266 A.D.2d 512, 698 N.Y.S.2d 553, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/izzo-v-dunn-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack