Vigo v. New York Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Vigo v. New York Hospital

294 A.D.2d 226, 741 N.Y.S.2d 859, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5330

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

DecidedMay 21, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 294 A.D.2d 226 (Vigo v. New York Hospital) 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

Vigo v. New York Hospital, 294 A.D.2d 226, 741 N.Y.S.2d 859, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5330 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Donna Mills, J.), entered January 31, 2001, which, upon a jury verdict as reduced pursuant to plaintiffs stipulation, awarded plaintiff damages, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The jury’s affirmative verdict as to defendant-physician’s liability in this medical malpractice action by a departure from accepted medical standards during the brain tumor operation was supported by sufficient evidence as a matter of law (see, Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 498-499). Given the severity and permanence of the neurological injuries resulting from defendants’ malpractice, the verdict, as reduced pursuant to plaintiffs stipulation following the partial grant of defendants’ posttrial motion to set aside the verdict, awarding plaintiff $7 million for past and future pain and suffering, does not deviate materially from what is reasonable compensation under the circumstances (see, CPLR 5501 [c]).

We have considered defendants’ remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Sullivan, Ellerin, Wallach and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Donna Mills, J.), entered January 31, 2001, which, upon a jury verdict as reduced pursuant to plaintiffs stipulation, awarded plaintiff damages, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The jury’s affirmative verdict as to defendant-physician’s liability in this medical malpractice action by a departure from accepted medical standards during the brain tumor operation was supported by sufficient evidence as a matter of law (see, Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 498-499). Given the severity and permanence of the neurological injuries resulting from defendants’ malpractice, the verdict, as reduced pursuant to plaintiffs stipulation following the partial grant of defendants’ posttrial motion to set aside the verdict, awarding plaintiff $7 million for past and future pain and suffering, does not deviate materially from what is reasonable compensation under the circumstances (see, CPLR 5501 [c]).

We have considered defendants’ remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Sullivan, Ellerin, Wallach and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 226, 741 N.Y.S.2d 859, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5330, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vigo-v-new-york-hospital-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack