Lopez v. Otto Gerdau Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lopez v. Otto Gerdau Co.

54 A.D.2d 708, 387 N.Y.S.2d 401, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14290

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

DecidedOctober 12, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 54 A.D.2d 708 (Lopez v. Otto Gerdau Co.) 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

Lopez v. Otto Gerdau Co., 54 A.D.2d 708, 387 N.Y.S.2d 401, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14290 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, plaintiff appeals, on the ground of inadequacy, from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered November 22, 1974, which, inter alia, is in his favor and against the Otto Gerdau Co., upon a jury verdict. Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. We hold that the trial court’s charge to the jury contained a proper instruction as to the measure of damages which could be awarded. The award was within the perimeter of the evidence adduced and should not be disturbed. Appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Martuscello, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Rabin and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, plaintiff appeals, on the ground of inadequacy, from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered November 22, 1974, which, inter alia, is in his favor and against the Otto Gerdau Co., upon a jury verdict. Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. We hold that the trial court’s charge to the jury contained a proper instruction as to the measure of damages which could be awarded. The award was within the perimeter of the evidence adduced and should not be disturbed. Appellant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Martuscello, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Rabin and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 A.D.2d 708, 387 N.Y.S.2d 401, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14290, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lopez-v-otto-gerdau-co-nyappdiv-1976.