Noga v. County of Onondaga

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Noga v. County of Onondaga

174 A.D.2d 981

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

DecidedJune 7, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 174 A.D.2d 981 (Noga v. County of Onondaga) 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

Noga v. County of Onondaga, 174 A.D.2d 981 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously reversed on the law and [982]*982facts with costs, motion granted in part and new trial granted, in accordance with the following Memorandum: The jury’s determination that plaintiff was 50% responsible for the accident is not against the weight of the evidence and that part of the verdict may stand. We conclude, however, that the awards for past pain and suffering, for future pain and suffering, and for the wife’s derivative claim are inadequate in that they "deviat[e] materially from what would be reasonable compensation” (CPLR 5501 [c]). Accordingly, a new trial is granted, limited to the issue of those items of damages. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Hurlbutt, J.—Set Aside Verdict.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Green and Balio, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously reversed on the law and [982]*982facts with costs, motion granted in part and new trial granted, in accordance with the following Memorandum: The jury’s determination that plaintiff was 50% responsible for the accident is not against the weight of the evidence and that part of the verdict may stand. We conclude, however, that the awards for past pain and suffering, for future pain and suffering, and for the wife’s derivative claim are inadequate in that they "deviat[e] materially from what would be reasonable compensation” (CPLR 5501 [c]). Accordingly, a new trial is granted, limited to the issue of those items of damages. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Hurlbutt, J.—Set Aside Verdict.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Green and Balio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 A.D.2d 981, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/noga-v-county-of-onondaga-nyappdiv-1991.