Zaccaro v. Jenik Motor Service

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Zaccaro v. Jenik Motor Service

148 Misc. 2d 664, 567 N.Y.S.2d 572, 1990 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 713

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 4, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 148 Misc. 2d 664 (Zaccaro v. Jenik Motor Service) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Zaccaro v. Jenik Motor Service, 148 Misc. 2d 664, 567 N.Y.S.2d 572, 1990 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 713 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

[665]*665OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Judgment unanimously reversed without costs and action dismissed.

Plaintiff sued for damages arising out of defective servicing of his automobile. Although the only monetary loss alleged by plaintiff at trial was $255.84, the court awarded $700, apparently because of the distress suffered by plaintiff and his family due to malfunction of the car while it was on the road. On appeal defendant admits to the negligence of its servicing.

The award to the extent that it was for mental distress was in error. Absent a traumatic event causing fear of safety (see, Ford v Village Imports, 92 AD2d 717) or some special relationship or duty owed the plaintiff (not present in this case) he may not recover for mental suffering arising from breach of contract or its negligent performance (see, 36 NY Jur 2d, Damages, § 102). Nor may plaintiff recover property damage since he failed to present a paid bill or estimates as required by CCA 1804.

Kassoff, P. J., Williams and Santucci, JJ., concur.

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

[665]*665OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Judgment unanimously reversed without costs and action dismissed.

Plaintiff sued for damages arising out of defective servicing of his automobile. Although the only monetary loss alleged by plaintiff at trial was $255.84, the court awarded $700, apparently because of the distress suffered by plaintiff and his family due to malfunction of the car while it was on the road. On appeal defendant admits to the negligence of its servicing.

The award to the extent that it was for mental distress was in error. Absent a traumatic event causing fear of safety (see, Ford v Village Imports, 92 AD2d 717) or some special relationship or duty owed the plaintiff (not present in this case) he may not recover for mental suffering arising from breach of contract or its negligent performance (see, 36 NY Jur 2d, Damages, § 102). Nor may plaintiff recover property damage since he failed to present a paid bill or estimates as required by CCA 1804.

Kassoff, P. J., Williams and Santucci, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

148 Misc. 2d 664, 567 N.Y.S.2d 572, 1990 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 713, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zaccaro-v-jenik-motor-service-nyappterm-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack