From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Calo v. Perez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 9, 1995
211 A.D.2d 607 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

January 9, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Becker, J.).


Ordered that the appeal from the judgment is dismissed because it was superseded by the resettled judgment; and it is further,

Ordered that the resettled judgment is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that the plaintiff is awarded one bill of costs.

Contrary to the defendants' contention, the evidence adduced at the trial amply supports the jury's verdict that the plaintiff sustained a significant injury as a result of an automobile accident on December 9, 1989. All of the plaintiff's medical witnesses testified that the plaintiff's herniated cervical disc and associated nerve damage were caused by the accident. In addition, the plaintiff's treating physician testified that 2 1/2 years after the accident the plaintiff had a 90% loss of neck motion. Thus, it cannot be said that the jury's verdict could not have been reached upon a fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Nicastro v. Park, 113 A.D.2d 129, 134).

In addition, the record amply supports the jury's award for past and future loss of earnings. The general rule is that loss of earnings must be established with reasonable certainty, focusing in part on the plaintiff's earning capacity both before and after the accident (see, Clanton v. Agoglitta, 206 A.D.2d 497; Kirschhoffer v. Van Dyke, 173 A.D.2d 7, 10). Here, the plaintiff established that prior to the accident he earned approximately $25,000 a year as a mason. The plaintiff also established that his injuries prevented him from working in the masonry profession. Thus, the jury's award for future loss of earnings does not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation.

The defendants' remaining contentions are without merit (see, Kupfer v. Dalton, 169 A.D.2d 819; Wilson v. Bodian, 130 A.D.2d 221, 224; Holshek v. Stokes, 122 A.D.2d 777, 778; Gunn v. City of New York, 104 A.D.2d 848, 849). Sullivan, J.P., Thompson, Copertino and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Calo v. Perez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 9, 1995
211 A.D.2d 607 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Calo v. Perez

Case Details

Full title:GIOVANNI CALO, Respondent, v. DORIAN PEREZ et al., Appellants

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 9, 1995

Citations

211 A.D.2d 607 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
621 N.Y.S.2d 370

Citing Cases

In Matter of Complaint of Delmarine, Inc.

The claimant Linda Fainer had the burden of establishing damages for past and future lost earnings with…

MIAH v. PRIVATE ONE OF NEW YORK LLC

At the core of lost earnings assessment is the "focus [ ], in part, on the plaintiff's earning capacity both…