Opinion
December 1, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J., and a jury).
The jury's finding that the infant plaintiff ingested paint containing lead, and as a result suffers from hyperactivity, attention deficit disorder and loss of cognitive function, and will likely suffer from kidney, liver and hearing dysfunctions, is not against the weight of the evidence. Defendant's present argument challenging the methodology used by plaintiffs' experts was waived by the absence of timely objection on that ground ( Horton v. Smith, 51 N.Y.2d 798), and was not cured by a motion to strike the testimony at the close of the case ( see, Rubio v. Reilly, 44 A.D.2d 592). We find that the award, as reduced, does not deviate materially from what is reasonable compensation ( cf., Miller v. Beaugrand, 169 A.D.2d 537, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 810; Hancock v. 330 Hull Realty Corp., 225 A.D.2d 365). We have considered defendant's remaining arguments and find them to be unavailing.
Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach and Tom, JJ.