Whelan v. Fondacaro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Whelan v. Fondacaro

23 A.D.2d 516, 255 N.Y.S.2d 323

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

DecidedJanuary 12, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 23 A.D.2d 516 (Whelan v. Fondacaro) 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

Whelan v. Fondacaro, 23 A.D.2d 516, 255 N.Y.S.2d 323 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appellant’s sole contention is that the verdict of $8,500 was excessive. Plaintiff sustained a somewhat severe injury to his neck muscles and ligaments but there was no proof of permanency. There was no satisfactory evidence of the time lost by plaintiff from his work as a carpenter by reason of his injuries, differentiated from the periods of his unemployment on account of the seasonal nature of his work. The jury could have properly found, however, that he experienced periods of acute pain and discomfort. The attending physicians’ bill of $97 was largely for diathermy treatments. There was property damage of $499.21. The combined verdict was excessive. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event, unless, within 20 days after service of a copy of the order to be entered hereon, respondent shall stipulate to reduce the verdict to $5,750, in which event judgment, as reduced, affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Taylor, Aulisi and Hamm, JJ., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

Appellant’s sole contention is that the verdict of $8,500 was excessive. Plaintiff sustained a somewhat severe injury to his neck muscles and ligaments but there was no proof of permanency. There was no satisfactory evidence of the time lost by plaintiff from his work as a carpenter by reason of his injuries, differentiated from the periods of his unemployment on account of the seasonal nature of his work. The jury could have properly found, however, that he experienced periods of acute pain and discomfort. The attending physicians’ bill of $97 was largely for diathermy treatments. There was property damage of $499.21. The combined verdict was excessive. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event, unless, within 20 days after service of a copy of the order to be entered hereon, respondent shall stipulate to reduce the verdict to $5,750, in which event judgment, as reduced, affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Taylor, Aulisi and Hamm, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 A.D.2d 516, 255 N.Y.S.2d 323, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whelan-v-fondacaro-nyappdiv-1965.