Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Ruben ELESCANO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v.
EIGHTH-19TH COMPANY, LLC, Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff, v. A & T Construction Corp., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Nicholas Figueroa, J. and a jury), entered April 5, 2004, in an action by a construction worker for personal injuries, awarding, inter alia, $100,000 for past pain and suffering and, insofar as appealed from, $50,000 for future pain and suffering over 37 years, unanimously modified, on the facts, to vacate the award for future pain and suffering and direct a new trial on that issue only, and otherwise affirmed, without costs, unless third-party defendant-respondent, within 30 days of service of a copy of this order with notice of entry, stipulates to increase the award for future pain and suffering to $200,000, and to the entry of an amended judgment in accordance therewith.
Plaintiff suffered a ruptured rotator cuff that required physical therapy three times a week for about a year, then surgery, then six more months of physical therapy, and then home exercise of 30 to 40 minutes a day continuing through the trial. Plaintiff's treating physician stated that the injury will cause plaintiff permanent and worsening chronic pain; defendant's expert acknowledged that plaintiff has a permanent partial disability with intermittent symptoms that can be painful with extreme motions. Under the circumstances, the award for future pain and suffering deviates materially from what is reasonable compensation under the circumstances (cf. Murakami v. Machinist, 3 A.D.3d 336, 769 N.Y.S.2d 886 [2004] ), and we accordingly modify as above indicated.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: April 21, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)