McFadden v. Florido

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McFadden v. Florido

198 A.D.2d 334, 605 N.Y.S.2d 887, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10708

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

DecidedNovember 15, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 198 A.D.2d 334 (McFadden v. Florido) 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

McFadden v. Florido, 198 A.D.2d 334, 605 N.Y.S.2d 887, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10708 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, on the ground of inadequacy, from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.), entered September 11, 1991, which, after a nonjury trial, awarded him damages in the principal sum of only $42,500. The plaintiff’s notice of appeal from the order entered August 29, 1991, is deemed a premature notice of appeal from the judgment (CPLR 5520 [c]).

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The amount awarded to the plaintiff did not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation (see, CPLR 5501 [c]). Nor did the court improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the plaintiff’s motion to amend his ad dam[335]*335num clause (see generally, Loomis v Civetta Corinno Constr. Corp., 54 NY2d 18). Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Eiber, O’Brien and Pizzuto, 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, the plaintiff appeals, on the ground of inadequacy, from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.), entered September 11, 1991, which, after a nonjury trial, awarded him damages in the principal sum of only $42,500. The plaintiff’s notice of appeal from the order entered August 29, 1991, is deemed a premature notice of appeal from the judgment (CPLR 5520 [c]).

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The amount awarded to the plaintiff did not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation (see, CPLR 5501 [c]). Nor did the court improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the plaintiff’s motion to amend his ad dam[335]*335num clause (see generally, Loomis v Civetta Corinno Constr. Corp., 54 NY2d 18). Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Eiber, O’Brien and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 A.D.2d 334, 605 N.Y.S.2d 887, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10708, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcfadden-v-florido-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack