Meeks v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Meeks v. City of New York

193 A.D.2d 465, 597 N.Y.S.2d 363, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4817

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

DecidedMay 13, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 193 A.D.2d 465 (Meeks v. City of New York) 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

Meeks v. City of New York, 193 A.D.2d 465, 597 N.Y.S.2d 363, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4817 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Seymour Schwartz, J.), entered March 4, 1992, which, upon a jury verdict, found defendant to be 90% negligent and adjudged that plaintiff recover $51,283.84 from defendant, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The testimony regarding post traumatic arthritis was properly precluded by the Trial Judge. Not only did plaintiff fail to include this condition in her bill of particulars (see, Ciriello v [466]*466Virgues, 156 AD2d 417, 418-419), but the doctor who was to testify about said condition noted that in cases concerning injuries similar to plaintiffs, there was only a 35 to 45 per cent chance that degenerative arthritis would develop in the ankle over a 10 to 15 year period, and plaintiff had not developed any such condition eight years after the injury, and thus, the condition would not fall within the concept of natural sequelae (cf., Grey v United Leasing, 91 AD2d 932, 934).

While the award for pain and suffering falls within the lower end of the scale for comparable injuries, we find no basis for interfering with the jury’s determination (see, CPLR 5501 [c]). Concur—Carro, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin and Kassal, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Seymour Schwartz, J.), entered March 4, 1992, which, upon a jury verdict, found defendant to be 90% negligent and adjudged that plaintiff recover $51,283.84 from defendant, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The testimony regarding post traumatic arthritis was properly precluded by the Trial Judge. Not only did plaintiff fail to include this condition in her bill of particulars (see, Ciriello v [466]*466Virgues, 156 AD2d 417, 418-419), but the doctor who was to testify about said condition noted that in cases concerning injuries similar to plaintiffs, there was only a 35 to 45 per cent chance that degenerative arthritis would develop in the ankle over a 10 to 15 year period, and plaintiff had not developed any such condition eight years after the injury, and thus, the condition would not fall within the concept of natural sequelae (cf., Grey v United Leasing, 91 AD2d 932, 934).

While the award for pain and suffering falls within the lower end of the scale for comparable injuries, we find no basis for interfering with the jury’s determination (see, CPLR 5501 [c]). Concur—Carro, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

193 A.D.2d 465, 597 N.Y.S.2d 363, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4817, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meeks-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack