From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rydell v. Pan Am Equities, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 22, 1999
262 A.D.2d 213 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

June 22, 1999.

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Dominick Viscardi, J.).


In light of the trial evidence, the jury's verdict was neither irrational nor against the weight of the evidence ( see, Cohen v. Hallmark Cards, 45 N.Y.2d 493, 497-499). The jury's award of $200,000 for past pain and suffering and $300,000 for future pain and suffering did not constitute a material deviation from what is reasonable compensation under the circumstances given the evidence demonstrating that plaintiff suffered a severely fractured ankle, which has thus far required surgery for open reduction and fixation and for removal of surgical hardware and may yet require additional surgery, and continues to experience the debilitating effects of the injury, among them symptoms of the onset of degenerative arthritis ( see, Po Yee So v. Wing Tat Realty, 259 A.D.2d 373).

Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Toni and Buckley, JJ.


Summaries of

Rydell v. Pan Am Equities, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 22, 1999
262 A.D.2d 213 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Rydell v. Pan Am Equities, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:SUSAN RYDELL, Respondent, v. PAN AM EQUITIES, INC., et al., Appellants…

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

Date published: Jun 22, 1999

Citations

262 A.D.2d 213 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
692 N.Y.S.2d 333

Citing Cases

Perez v. Live Nation Worldwide, Inc.

Nonetheless, what constitutes reasonable compensation in one era might be insufficient in a later era . Thus,…

McNamara v. Hittner

Based on our review of the record, there is no evidence that substantial justice was not done. However, the…