Ramos v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ramos v. City of New York

169 A.D.2d 687, 565 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 882

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

DecidedJanuary 31, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 169 A.D.2d 687 (Ramos 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

Ramos v. City of New York, 169 A.D.2d 687, 565 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 882 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.). entered on or about November 21, 1989, which, inter alia, granted the municipal defendants’ motion for a new trial unless plaintiffs stipulated to a reduction of damages from $180,000 to $75,000, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

As the result of a Caesarean operation in which plaintiff Norma Ramos’ first child was stillborn, the plaintiff suffered pain for approximately one year, was unable to enjoy sexual relations for approximately six months, has a fear of future vaginal deliveries, and has a scar. The IAS court properly determined that damages of $180,000 deviated materially from what would be reasonable compensation (CPLR 5501 [c]), and properly determined that $75,000 would be a reasonable award for these injuries.

The IAS court properly declined to allow the plaintiffs to collect damages for Mrs. Ramos’ emotional distress resulting from the stillbirth of the child on a theory of independent physical injury (see generally, Tebbutt v Virostek, 65 NY2d 931). Nor can the infection which killed the fetus be regarded as an independent physical injury suffered by the mother, as the evidence in the record does not establish that the mother in fact contracted this infection.

We have reviewed the plaintiffs’ other arguments, and find them to be without merit. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Wallach, Asch, Kassal and Smith, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.). entered on or about November 21, 1989, which, inter alia, granted the municipal defendants’ motion for a new trial unless plaintiffs stipulated to a reduction of damages from $180,000 to $75,000, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

As the result of a Caesarean operation in which plaintiff Norma Ramos’ first child was stillborn, the plaintiff suffered pain for approximately one year, was unable to enjoy sexual relations for approximately six months, has a fear of future vaginal deliveries, and has a scar. The IAS court properly determined that damages of $180,000 deviated materially from what would be reasonable compensation (CPLR 5501 [c]), and properly determined that $75,000 would be a reasonable award for these injuries.

The IAS court properly declined to allow the plaintiffs to collect damages for Mrs. Ramos’ emotional distress resulting from the stillbirth of the child on a theory of independent physical injury (see generally, Tebbutt v Virostek, 65 NY2d 931). Nor can the infection which killed the fetus be regarded as an independent physical injury suffered by the mother, as the evidence in the record does not establish that the mother in fact contracted this infection.

We have reviewed the plaintiffs’ other arguments, and find them to be without merit. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Wallach, Asch, Kassal and Smith, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 A.D.2d 687, 565 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 882, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ramos-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack