Schwartz v. Pete

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Schwartz v. Pete

117 A.D.2d 501, 498 N.Y.S.2d 992, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 52781

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

DecidedFebruary 4, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 117 A.D.2d 501 (Schwartz v. Pete) 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

Schwartz v. Pete, 117 A.D.2d 501, 498 N.Y.S.2d 992, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 52781 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Irwin M. Silbowitz, J.), entered on October 31, 1984, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs or disbursements, and a new trial ordered solely on the issue of damages, unless the plaintiff within 20 days after service upon her attorney of a copy of the order 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 her favor to $1,500,000 less 20% thereof representing the jury’s finding of comparative fault making a total of $1,200,000 and to the entry of an amended judgment in accordance therewith. If plaintiff so stipulates, the judgment, as so amended and reduced, is affirmed, without costs and without disbursements.

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

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Irwin M. Silbowitz, J.), entered on October 31, 1984, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs or disbursements, and a new trial ordered solely on the issue of damages, unless the plaintiff within 20 days after service upon her attorney of a copy of the order 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 her favor to $1,500,000 less 20% thereof representing the jury’s finding of comparative fault making a total of $1,200,000 and to the entry of an amended judgment in accordance therewith. If plaintiff so stipulates, the judgment, as so amended and reduced, is affirmed, without costs and without disbursements.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

117 A.D.2d 501, 498 N.Y.S.2d 992, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 52781, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schwartz-v-pete-nyappdiv-1986.