Wool v. Ayres

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wool v. Ayres

283 A.D.2d 299, 724 N.Y.S.2d 612, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5400

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

DecidedMay 22, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 283 A.D.2d 299 (Wool v. Ayres) 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

Wool v. Ayres, 283 A.D.2d 299, 724 N.Y.S.2d 612, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5400 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Howe, J.), entered May 5, 2000, which, after a nonjury trial with respect to damages, inter alia, awarded plaintiff the sum of $996,950, plus interest, costs and disbursements, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[300]*300Examination of the trial record discloses no basis for setting aside the trial court’s determination as to the damages sustained by plaintiff when his artwork was damaged or destroyed in a fire attributable to defendant’s negligence, since the proof, including extensive documentary evidence and uncontroverted testimony from an expert art appraiser concerning the value of the damaged or destroyed artwork (see, Jenkins v Etlinger, 55 NY2d 35, 39; A & B Enters, v Hartford Ins. Co., 198 AD2d 389, 390), is amply supportive of the trial court’s award (see, Thoreson v Penthouse Intl., 80 NY2d 490, 495; 318 E. 93 v Ward, 276 AD2d 277). Nor should the award have been reduced by commissions that would have been paid to galleries had the lost artwork been sold, since, according to the proof, the lost artwork was part of plaintiffs private collection and, as such, was not for sale (see, Indemnity Ins. Co. v Art Students League, 225 AD2d 398).

We have considered defendant’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Williams, J. P., Ellerin, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Howe, J.), entered May 5, 2000, which, after a nonjury trial with respect to damages, inter alia, awarded plaintiff the sum of $996,950, plus interest, costs and disbursements, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[300]*300Examination of the trial record discloses no basis for setting aside the trial court’s determination as to the damages sustained by plaintiff when his artwork was damaged or destroyed in a fire attributable to defendant’s negligence, since the proof, including extensive documentary evidence and uncontroverted testimony from an expert art appraiser concerning the value of the damaged or destroyed artwork (see, Jenkins v Etlinger, 55 NY2d 35, 39; A & B Enters, v Hartford Ins. Co., 198 AD2d 389, 390), is amply supportive of the trial court’s award (see, Thoreson v Penthouse Intl., 80 NY2d 490, 495; 318 E. 93 v Ward, 276 AD2d 277). Nor should the award have been reduced by commissions that would have been paid to galleries had the lost artwork been sold, since, according to the proof, the lost artwork was part of plaintiffs private collection and, as such, was not for sale (see, Indemnity Ins. Co. v Art Students League, 225 AD2d 398).

We have considered defendant’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Williams, J. P., Ellerin, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D.2d 299, 724 N.Y.S.2d 612, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5400, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wool-v-ayres-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack