From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rizzuto v. Getty Petroleum Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 3, 2001
289 A.D.2d 217 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

2001-01633

Argued November 8, 2001

December 3, 2001.

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for the discharge of petroleum in violation of Navigation Law article 12, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schneier, J.), dated December 4, 2000, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiffs and against them in the principal sum of $509,000.

Robert G. DelGadio, Uniondale, N.Y., for appellants.

Charles E. Holster III, Mineola, N.Y., for respondents.

Before: WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, J.P., NANCY E. SMITH, THOMAS A. ADAMS, BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

An underground petroleum storage tank owned by the appellants leaked onto the respondents' properties. The appellants admitted to liability, and the respondents were awarded damages in the principal sum of $509,000 for the diminution in value of their properties.

Contrary to the appellants' contention, the damages awarded to the respondents did not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation (see, CPLR 5501[c]). Furthermore, although certain appraisal reports were hearsay and, therefore, improperly admitted into evidence, the error was harmless since we are satisfied that the result would have been the same if the appraisal reports had not been admitted (see, Barracato v. Camp Bauman Buses, 217 A.D.2d 677).

The appellants' remaining contentions are without merit.

FRIEDMANN, J.P., SMITH, ADAMS and COZIER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Rizzuto v. Getty Petroleum Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 3, 2001
289 A.D.2d 217 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Rizzuto v. Getty Petroleum Corp.

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH P. RIZZUTO, et al., respondents, v. GETTY PETROLEUM CORP., et al.…

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

Date published: Dec 3, 2001

Citations

289 A.D.2d 217 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
736 N.Y.S.2d 233

Citing Cases

Williams v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth.

Here, it cannot be said that the evidence so preponderated in the defendant's favor that the verdict could…

Sanchez v. City of New York

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs. The trial court providently exercised its discretion in…