From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gillespie v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 28, 1966
26 A.D.2d 953 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)

Summary

In Gillespie v Great Atlantic Pacific Tea Co. (26 A.D.2d 953), the court stated that: "preverdict interest is not allowable on a verdict for personal injuries, even though the complaint was couched in the form of an action for damages for breach of an implied warranty of fitness for use (* * * DeLong Corp. v. Morrison-Knudsen Co., 20 A.D.2d 104, 108-109, affd. 14 N.Y.2d 346)."

Summary of this case from Loeb v. Teitelbaum

Opinion

November 28, 1966


Order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated December 11, 1964, affirmed, without costs. Appeal from judgment dated November 10, 1964 has been withdrawn. In our opinion, preverdict interest is not allowable on a verdict for personal injuries, even though the complaint was couched in the form of an action for damages for breach of an implied warranty of fitness for use ( West v. L.J.F. Corp., 207 N.Y.S.2d 715; see, also, CPLR 5001, subd. [a]; McKinney's Cons. Laws of N.Y., Book 7B, CPLR 5001 and notes thereto; 1950 Report of N.Y. Law Rev. Comm., pp. 108-109; 5 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N.Y. Civ. Prac., par. 5001.07; De Long Corp. v. Morrison-Knudsen Co., 20 A.D.2d 104, 108-109, affd. 14 N.Y.2d 346). Insofar as Miller v. Foltis Fisher, Inc. ( 152 Misc. 24); Brown v. Godefroy Mfg. Co. ( 278 App. Div. 242); Gellman v. Hotel Corp. of America ( 46 Misc.2d 521) and Weinstein-Korn-Miller ( supra) hold or indicate to the contrary, we are not inclined to follow them. Ughetta, Acting P.J., Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur; Brennan, J., not voting. [ 44 Misc.2d 670.]


Summaries of

Gillespie v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 28, 1966
26 A.D.2d 953 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)

In Gillespie v Great Atlantic Pacific Tea Co. (26 A.D.2d 953), the court stated that: "preverdict interest is not allowable on a verdict for personal injuries, even though the complaint was couched in the form of an action for damages for breach of an implied warranty of fitness for use (* * * DeLong Corp. v. Morrison-Knudsen Co., 20 A.D.2d 104, 108-109, affd. 14 N.Y.2d 346)."

Summary of this case from Loeb v. Teitelbaum
Case details for

Gillespie v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.

Case Details

Full title:ALVIS B. GILLESPIE et al., Appellants, v. GREAT ATLANTIC PACIFIC TEA…

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

Date published: Nov 28, 1966

Citations

26 A.D.2d 953 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)

Citing Cases

Raman v. Carborundum Company

However, we are also of the opinion that the verdict was excessive to the extent indicated herein,…

Loeb v. Teitelbaum

Decisional law compels awarding of interest as of the date of the verdict in compensatory and punitive suits.…