Opinion
May 23, 1988
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Wade, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs or disbursements, and the order is modified, on the facts and as an exercise of discretion, by deleting the provision thereof which denied that branch of the posttrial motion which was for a new trial as to damages, and substituting therefor a provision granting that branch of the motion, and as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements, and a new trial is granted on the issue of damages only, unless within 20 days after service upon the plaintiff of a copy of this decision and order, with notice of entry, the plaintiff shall serve and file in the office of the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Kings County, a written stipulation consenting to reduce the verdict as to damages to the principal sum of $150,000, and to the entry of an amended judgment accordingly; in the event the plaintiff so stipulates, then the judgment and the order, as so reduced and amended, are affirmed, without costs or disbursements; the findings of fact as to liability are affirmed.
On December 24, 1982, the plaintiff, an outpatient at Coney Island Hospital (hereinafter CIH), fell as she attempted to exit the hospital through a doorway to the side of the hospital's main entrance. The plaintiff, who was 82 years of age at the time of the accident, sustained injuries to her left ankle and foot as a result of the fall. Immediately following the accident, the plaintiff was taken to the emergency room of CIH where she was examined, X-rayed, and diagnosed as having suffered a sprain to the left ankle. The attending physician bandaged the plaintiff's leg and ankle and instructed her to soak the area in warm water and perform exercises that would assist in the healing process. The plaintiff followed the physician's instructions but her condition worsened.
On January 11, 1982, the plaintiff returned to CIH where it was determined that she had suffered a fractured left foot.
Thereafter, the plaintiff commenced the instant action asserting causes of action sounding in both negligence and medical malpractice. Following a trial, the jury found that the defendants were negligent in maintaining a defectively designed exit door which was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries. In addition, the jury concluded that the defendants' failure to diagnose the fractures in the plaintiff's foot was a deviation from accepted medical practice and was a proximate cause of her subsequent injuries and damages. The jury awarded the plaintiff $1,000,000 in damages.
Based upon our review of the record, we find the verdict was excessive to the extent indicated.
We have reviewed the defendants' remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Lawrence, J.P., Kunzeman, Eiber and Balletta, JJ., concur.