Rivera v. Nabisco Brands, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rivera v. Nabisco Brands, Inc.

129 A.D.2d 540, 514 N.Y.S.2d 636, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 45210

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

DecidedApril 30, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 129 A.D.2d 540 (Rivera v. Nabisco Brands, Inc.) 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

Rivera v. Nabisco Brands, Inc., 129 A.D.2d 540, 514 N.Y.S.2d 636, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 45210 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alfred J. Callahan, J.), entered April 22, 1986, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, and a new trial ordered solely on the issue of damages, without costs or disbursements, unless the plaintiff, within 20 days after service upon plaintiff’s attorney of a copy of the order to be entered herein, with notice of entry, serves and files in the office of the clerk of the trial court a written stipulation consenting to reduce the verdict in [541]*541plaintiffs favor to $75,000 and to the entry of an amended judgment in accordance therewith. If plaintiff so stipulates, the judgment, as so reduced, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The appeal from the order entered October 31, 1986 is unanimously dismissed, without costs, as having been subsumed in the appeal from the judgment entered April 22, 1986.

After review of the record, the damages appear to us to be excessive to the extent indicated. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ross, Asch, Milonas and Wallach, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alfred J. Callahan, J.), entered April 22, 1986, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, and a new trial ordered solely on the issue of damages, without costs or disbursements, unless the plaintiff, within 20 days after service upon plaintiff’s attorney of a copy of the order to be entered herein, with notice of entry, serves and files in the office of the clerk of the trial court a written stipulation consenting to reduce the verdict in [541]*541plaintiffs favor to $75,000 and to the entry of an amended judgment in accordance therewith. If plaintiff so stipulates, the judgment, as so reduced, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The appeal from the order entered October 31, 1986 is unanimously dismissed, without costs, as having been subsumed in the appeal from the judgment entered April 22, 1986.

After review of the record, the damages appear to us to be excessive to the extent indicated. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ross, Asch, Milonas and Wallach, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

129 A.D.2d 540, 514 N.Y.S.2d 636, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 45210, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rivera-v-nabisco-brands-inc-nyappdiv-1987.