Latcha v. Tartus

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Latcha v. Tartus

86 A.D.2d 797, 453 N.Y.S.2d 2, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15416

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

DecidedFebruary 9, 1982

StatusPublished

This text of 86 A.D.2d 797 (Latcha v. Tartus) 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

Latcha v. Tartus, 86 A.D.2d 797, 453 N.Y.S.2d 2, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15416 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion for resettlement granted insofar as to recall the order of this court entered on December 8, 1981 (85 AD2d 525) and the memorandum decision filed therewith, to resettle the order and substitute a new memorandum as follows: Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Cotton, J.), entered on April 3, 1981, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of reversing the judgment in favor of plaintiff Rabindranauth Vernon Latcha and a new trial ordered on the issue of damages awarded to said plaintiff, without costs and without disbursements, and said judgment is otherwise affirmed, unless plaintiff Rabindranauth Vernon Latcha, within 20 days after service upon him of a copy of the resettled order herein, with notice of entry, serves [798]*798and files in the office of the clerk of the trial court a written stipulation consenting to reduce the verdict in his favor to $100,000 and to the entry of an amended judgment in accordance therewith. If plaintiff Rabindranauth Vernon Latcha so stipulates, the judgment as so amended and reduced is affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. After review of the record, the damages appear to us to be excessive to the extent indicated. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Sullivan, Markewich and Lynch, JJ.

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

Motion for resettlement granted insofar as to recall the order of this court entered on December 8, 1981 (85 AD2d 525) and the memorandum decision filed therewith, to resettle the order and substitute a new memorandum as follows: Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Cotton, J.), entered on April 3, 1981, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of reversing the judgment in favor of plaintiff Rabindranauth Vernon Latcha and a new trial ordered on the issue of damages awarded to said plaintiff, without costs and without disbursements, and said judgment is otherwise affirmed, unless plaintiff Rabindranauth Vernon Latcha, within 20 days after service upon him of a copy of the resettled order herein, with notice of entry, serves [798]*798and files in the office of the clerk of the trial court a written stipulation consenting to reduce the verdict in his favor to $100,000 and to the entry of an amended judgment in accordance therewith. If plaintiff Rabindranauth Vernon Latcha so stipulates, the judgment as so amended and reduced is affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. After review of the record, the damages appear to us to be excessive to the extent indicated. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Kupferman, Sullivan, Markewich and Lynch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

86 A.D.2d 797, 453 N.Y.S.2d 2, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15416, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/latcha-v-tartus-nyappdiv-1982.