Kehrli v. City of Utica

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kehrli v. City of Utica

105 A.D.2d 1085, 482 N.Y.S.2d 189, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21172

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

DecidedNovember 7, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 105 A.D.2d 1085 (Kehrli v. City of Utica) 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

Kehrli v. City of Utica, 105 A.D.2d 1085, 482 N.Y.S.2d 189, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21172 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed, with costs, motion denied and new trial granted, in accordance with the following memorandum: In the interest of justice, a new trial is necessary on the issue of damages only. Where a jury has determined that the plaintiff is entitled to recover from the defendant, it must render a verdict in a sum of money which will justly and fairly compensate the plaintiff for the loss resulting from the injuries sustained. It was not necessary for the plaintiff to prove damages in the form of out-of-pocket expenses. The measure of damages for false imprisonment is such sum that would fairly and reasonably compensate the plaintiff for injuries caused by defendant’s wrongful act, including damages for mental anguish, shame and humiliation, injury to reputation, physical suffering, loss of earnings and legal expenses in defending a prior action so long as the damages are proximately caused by the illegal act (see 2 NY PJI614-615; 22 NY Jur, False Imprisonment, § 60). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, O’Donnell, J. — false arrest.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Schnepp, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed, with costs, motion denied and new trial granted, in accordance with the following memorandum: In the interest of justice, a new trial is necessary on the issue of damages only. Where a jury has determined that the plaintiff is entitled to recover from the defendant, it must render a verdict in a sum of money which will justly and fairly compensate the plaintiff for the loss resulting from the injuries sustained. It was not necessary for the plaintiff to prove damages in the form of out-of-pocket expenses. The measure of damages for false imprisonment is such sum that would fairly and reasonably compensate the plaintiff for injuries caused by defendant’s wrongful act, including damages for mental anguish, shame and humiliation, injury to reputation, physical suffering, loss of earnings and legal expenses in defending a prior action so long as the damages are proximately caused by the illegal act (see 2 NY PJI614-615; 22 NY Jur, False Imprisonment, § 60). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, O’Donnell, J. — false arrest.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Schnepp, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 A.D.2d 1085, 482 N.Y.S.2d 189, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21172, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kehrli-v-city-of-utica-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack