Nardella v. Gerut

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Nardella v. Gerut

39 A.D.3d 268, 834 N.Y.S.2d 104

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

DecidedApril 5, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 39 A.D.3d 268 (Nardella v. Gerut) 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

Nardella v. Gerut, 39 A.D.3d 268, 834 N.Y.S.2d 104 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Nelson S. Roman, J.), entered October 24, 2005, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the brief, granted defendant’s posttrial motion for a new trial on damages for future pain and suffering unless plaintiff stipulated to reduce the jury award on that element from $200,000 to $20,000, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The result of plaintiff’s nasal reconstructive surgery was cosmetically not to her satisfaction. The court found no medical support for future pain or difficulty in breathing. Reduction of damages for future pain and suffering was thus warranted because the amount awarded by the jury deviated materially from what would be reasonable compensation under the circumstances (CPLR 5501 [c]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Marlow, Sullivan, Gonzalez and Kavanagh, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Nelson S. Roman, J.), entered October 24, 2005, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the brief, granted defendant’s posttrial motion for a new trial on damages for future pain and suffering unless plaintiff stipulated to reduce the jury award on that element from $200,000 to $20,000, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The result of plaintiff’s nasal reconstructive surgery was cosmetically not to her satisfaction. The court found no medical support for future pain or difficulty in breathing. Reduction of damages for future pain and suffering was thus warranted because the amount awarded by the jury deviated materially from what would be reasonable compensation under the circumstances (CPLR 5501 [c]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Marlow, Sullivan, Gonzalez and Kavanagh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.3d 268, 834 N.Y.S.2d 104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nardella-v-gerut-nyappdiv-2007.