Montenegro v. Richfield Properties, Ltd.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Montenegro v. Richfield Properties, Ltd.

269 A.D.2d 505, 704 N.Y.S.2d 497, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1960

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 22, 2000·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County [506] (Vaughan, J.), dated December 16, 1998, as, upon a jury verdict on the issue of liability finding the defendant Consol Building Associates 40% at fault and the third-party defendant Galaxy Knitting Mills, Inc., 60% at fault in the happening of the accident, and upon a jury verdict on the issue of damages awarding the plaintiff Rosanna Montenegro the sum of $379,400 ($115,000 for past pain and suffering, $20,000 for past lost earnings, $182,000 for future pain and suffering, $21,000 for past medical expenses, and $250,000 for future medical expenses which was subsequently reduced to $41,400 by order of the same court dated May 29, 1998), and the plaintiff Jose Montenegro the sum of $20,000 for loss of services, is in favor of the plaintiffs and against them in the sum of $399,400.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the appellants’ contention, the trial court properly admitted the testimony of the plaintiffs’ expert regarding a developing arthritic condition and the need for future surgery (see, Holshek v Stokes, 122 AD2d 777; Manoni v Giordano, 102 AD2d 846).

The awards did not deviate from what would be reasonable compensation under the circumstances (see, CPLR 5501 [c]; Chase v City of New York, 233 AD2d 474; Gaetan v New York City Tr. Auth., 213 AD2d 510). Sullivan, J. P.; S. Miller, Friedmann and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County [506] (Vaughan, J.), dated December 16, 1998, as, upon a jury verdict on the issue of liability finding the defendant Consol Building Associates 40% at fault and the third-party defendant Galaxy Knitting Mills, Inc., 60% at fault in the happening of the accident, and upon a jury verdict on the issue of damages awarding the plaintiff Rosanna Montenegro the sum of $379,400 ($115,000 for past pain and suffering, $20,000 for past lost earnings, $182,000 for future pain and suffering, $21,000 for past medical expenses, and $250,000 for future medical expenses which was subsequently reduced to $41,400 by order of the same court dated May 29, 1998), and the plaintiff Jose Montenegro the sum of $20,000 for loss of services, is in favor of the plaintiffs and against them in the sum of $399,400.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the appellants’ contention, the trial court properly admitted the testimony of the plaintiffs’ expert regarding a developing arthritic condition and the need for future surgery (see, Holshek v Stokes, 122 AD2d 777; Manoni v Giordano, 102 AD2d 846).

The awards did not deviate from what would be reasonable compensation under the circumstances (see, CPLR 5501 [c]; Chase v City of New York, 233 AD2d 474; Gaetan v New York City Tr. Auth., 213 AD2d 510). Sullivan, J. P.; S. Miller, Friedmann and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Montenegro v. Richfield Properties, Ltd., 269 A.D.2d 505, 704 N.Y.S.2d 497, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1960 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

269 A.D.2d 505 (Montenegro v. Richfield Properties, Ltd.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related