Saft v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Saft v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.

124 A.D.3d 410, 1 N.Y.S.3d 42

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

DecidedJanuary 6, 2015

Docket13878 100874/10

StatusPublished

This text of 124 A.D.3d 410 (Saft v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, 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

Saft v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc., 124 A.D.3d 410, 1 N.Y.S.3d 42 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Cynthia S. Kern, J.), entered November 4, 2013, upon a jury verdict apportioning fault 50% against plaintiff and 50% against defendant, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, awarded plaintiff $17,000 for past pain and suffering, and $8,000 for future pain and suffering, after apportionment, unanimously reversed, on the facts, without costs, the awards for past and future pain and suffering vacated, and the matter remanded for a new trial on those damages only, unless within 20 days of service of a copy of this order, with notice of entry, defendant stipulates to increase the awards, before apportionment, to $370,000 for past pain and suffering, and $150,000 for future pain and suffering.

The award for past and future pain and suffering deviated materially from what would be reasonable compensation in light of awards approved in similar cases, the type of injury, the level and duration of pain suffered by plaintiff, the surgical procedure and physical therapy she underwent, her age and activity level, and the long-term effects and limitations on her life (see Garcia v Queens Surface Corp., 271 AD2d 277, 278 [1st Dept 2000]; Pinto v Gormally, 109 AD3d 425, 427 [1st Dept 2013], lv denied 22 NY3d 862 [2014]).

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, DeGrasse, Manzanet-Daniels, Feinman and Gische, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Cynthia S. Kern, J.), entered November 4, 2013, upon a jury verdict apportioning fault 50% against plaintiff and 50% against defendant, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, awarded plaintiff $17,000 for past pain and suffering, and $8,000 for future pain and suffering, after apportionment, unanimously reversed, on the facts, without costs, the awards for past and future pain and suffering vacated, and the matter remanded for a new trial on those damages only, unless within 20 days of service of a copy of this order, with notice of entry, defendant stipulates to increase the awards, before apportionment, to $370,000 for past pain and suffering, and $150,000 for future pain and suffering.

The award for past and future pain and suffering deviated materially from what would be reasonable compensation in light of awards approved in similar cases, the type of injury, the level and duration of pain suffered by plaintiff, the surgical procedure and physical therapy she underwent, her age and activity level, and the long-term effects and limitations on her life (see Garcia v Queens Surface Corp., 271 AD2d 277, 278 [1st Dept 2000]; Pinto v Gormally, 109 AD3d 425, 427 [1st Dept 2013], lv denied 22 NY3d 862 [2014]).

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, DeGrasse, Manzanet-Daniels, Feinman and Gische, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

124 A.D.3d 410, 1 N.Y.S.3d 42, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/saft-v-consolidated-edison-co-of-new-york-inc-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack