Sandor v. Katz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sandor v. Katz

27 A.D.2d 766, 277 N.Y.S.2d 92, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4881

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

DecidedFebruary 10, 1967

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 27 A.D.2d 766 (Sandor v. Katz) 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

Sandor v. Katz, 27 A.D.2d 766, 277 N.Y.S.2d 92, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4881 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Reynolds, J.

Appeal from an order and judgment of the Supreme Court, Ulster County, on the grounds that the jury’s verdict in favor of respondent in the amount of $15,171.80 is excessive as a matter of law and is against the weight of the evidence. The issue of damages is factual and thus is essentially a determination for the jury. It is only where it can be said that a verdict is clearly excessive that an interference with it and the trial court’s considered evaluation thereof is warranted. That another trier of the facts might well have arrived at a lower amount is not the test (Colby v. Drew, 15 A D 2d 846), nor is the amount of special damages an absolutely controlling factor (Becker v. Ginsberg, 23 A D 2d 916). On the instant record, especially since appellant offered no proof to contradict respondent’s medical testimony and allegations of loss of business and professional opportunities, the jury’s determination of damages must be upheld. We find no merit in appellant’s contention that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. Order and judgment affirmed, with costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Aulisi and Staley, Jr., JJ., concur in a memorandum decision by Reynolds, J.

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

Reynolds, J.

Appeal from an order and judgment of the Supreme Court, Ulster County, on the grounds that the jury’s verdict in favor of respondent in the amount of $15,171.80 is excessive as a matter of law and is against the weight of the evidence. The issue of damages is factual and thus is essentially a determination for the jury. It is only where it can be said that a verdict is clearly excessive that an interference with it and the trial court’s considered evaluation thereof is warranted. That another trier of the facts might well have arrived at a lower amount is not the test (Colby v. Drew, 15 A D 2d 846), nor is the amount of special damages an absolutely controlling factor (Becker v. Ginsberg, 23 A D 2d 916). On the instant record, especially since appellant offered no proof to contradict respondent’s medical testimony and allegations of loss of business and professional opportunities, the jury’s determination of damages must be upheld. We find no merit in appellant’s contention that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. Order and judgment affirmed, with costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Aulisi and Staley, Jr., JJ., concur in a memorandum decision by Reynolds, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 A.D.2d 766, 277 N.Y.S.2d 92, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4881, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sandor-v-katz-nyappdiv-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack