Medvejer v. Katz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Medvejer v. Katz

138 A.D.2d 361, 525 N.Y.S.2d 585, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2111

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 7, 1988·Published

Opinion

Motion by the plaintiffs for "clarification” of a decision and order of this court, dated June 22, 1987, which affirmed an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated July 17, 1986.

Ordered that the motion is granted, and the following sentence is added to the end of the last paragraph of the decision and order: "However, since the defendants failed to timely stipulate to the increase in damages to $23,000, the plaintiffs are entitled to an adjudication of damages de novo, at which time the jury, if the evidence warrants it, may award the plaintiffs in excess of $23,000”. Mangano, J. P., Brown, Eiber and Harwood, JJ., concur.

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

Motion by the plaintiffs for "clarification” of a decision and order of this court, dated June 22, 1987, which affirmed an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated July 17, 1986.

Ordered that the motion is granted, and the following sentence is added to the end of the last paragraph of the decision and order: "However, since the defendants failed to timely stipulate to the increase in damages to $23,000, the plaintiffs are entitled to an adjudication of damages de novo, at which time the jury, if the evidence warrants it, may award the plaintiffs in excess of $23,000”. Mangano, J. P., Brown, Eiber and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Medvejer v. Katz, 138 A.D.2d 361, 525 N.Y.S.2d 585, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2111 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

138 A.D.2d 361 (Medvejer v. Katz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.