From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Montenegro v. Richfield Properties, Ltd.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 24, 2000
269 A.D.2d 505 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Argued January 7, 2000

February 24, 2000

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaughan, J.), dated December 16, 1998, as, upon a jury verdict on the issue of liability finding the defendant Consol Building Associates 40% at fault and the third-party defendant Galaxy Knitting Mills, Inc., 60% at fault in the happening of the accident, and upon a jury verdict on the issue of damages awarding the plaintiff Rosanna Montenegro the sum of $379,400 ($115,000 for past pain and suffering, $20,000 for past lost earnings, $182,000 for future pain and suffering, $21,000 for past medical expenses, and $250,000 for future medical expenses which was subsequently reduced to $41,400 by order of the same court dated May 29, 1998), and the plaintiff Jose Montenegro the sum of $20,000 for loss of services, is in favor of the plaintiffs and against them in the sum of $399,400.

Jacobowitz, Garfinkel Lesman (Fiedelman McGaw, Jericho, N Y [James K. O'Sullivan] of counsel), for defendants third-party plaintiffs-appellants.

Samuel J. Lurie, New York, N.Y. (Robert R. Mac Donnell of counsel), for respondents.

THOMAS R. SULLIVAN, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the appellants' contention, the trial court properly admitted the testimony of the plaintiffs' expert regarding a developing arthritic condition and the need for future surgery (see, Holshek v. Stokes, 122 A.D.2d 777 ; Manoni v. Giordano, 102 A.D.2d 846 ). The awards did not deviate from what would be reasonable compensation under the circumstances (see, CPLR 5501[d];Chase v. City of New York, 233 A.D.2d 474 ; Gaetan v. New York City Tr. Auth., 213 A.D.2d 510 ).


Summaries of

Montenegro v. Richfield Properties, Ltd.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 24, 2000
269 A.D.2d 505 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Montenegro v. Richfield Properties, Ltd.

Case Details

Full title:ROSANNA MONTENEGRO, et al., respondents, v. RICHFIELD PROPERTIES, LTD., et…

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

Date published: Feb 24, 2000

Citations

269 A.D.2d 505 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
704 N.Y.S.2d 497

Citing Cases

Hammond v. Welsh

The defendants' attorney did not object to certain other comments, including those concerning the motives of…

Floyd v. 1710 Realty, LLC

However, with respect to the damages portion of the trial, the Supreme Court erred in allowing the…