From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Guido v. State of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 19, 2001
288 A.D.2d 345 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Argued November 5, 2001.

November 19, 2001.

In a claim to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from (1) so much of a judgment of the Court of Claims (Rossetti, J.), dated August 21, 2000, as awarded postverdict and postjudgment interest at the statutory rate of 9% per annum, and (2) an order of the same court, entered January 8, 2001, which denied its motion to amend the judgment to set postverdict and postjudgment interest at a lesser rate.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General, New York, N.Y. (Peter H. Schiff and Michael S. Buskus of counsel), for appellant.

Culleton, Marinaccio Foglia, White Plains, N.Y. (Philip F. Foglia of counsel), for respondents.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, LEO F. McGINITY, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.


ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

ORDERED that the order is affirmed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the claimants are awarded one bill of costs.

The State of New York failed to overcome the presumption that the statutory rate of interest of 9% per annum (see, CPLR 5004) was fair and reasonable (see, Auer v. State of New York, 283 A.D.2d 122; Capolino Constr. Corp. v. White Plains Hous. Auth, 275 A.D.2d 347).

SANTUCCI, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, McGINITY and CRANE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Guido v. State of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 19, 2001
288 A.D.2d 345 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Guido v. State of New York

Case Details

Full title:JUDITH ANN COOPER GUIDO, ETC., ET AL., respondents, v. STATE OF NEW YORK…

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

Date published: Nov 19, 2001

Citations

288 A.D.2d 345 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
732 N.Y.S.2d 897

Citing Cases

Denio v. State

CPLR 1206 (c) provides guidance for the determination of a proper rate of interest. ( Gold v United Health…

Conte v. City of New York

The defendant failed to overcome the presumption that the statutory rate of interest of 9% per annum (see…