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.
Eusebia MIRANDA, et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. NEW DIMENSION REALTY CO. et al., Defendants-Appellants.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered on or about November 24, 1999, which granted plaintiff's motion for a new trial on past and future pain suffering to the extent of granting such a new trial unless there was an additur increasing the jury's preapportionment awards for past pain and suffering from $100,000 to $400,000 and for future pain and suffering from $200,000 to $400,000 over 25 years, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff sustained a subluxation/dislocation of the neck vertebrae C1 through C4, including rupture of the large cervical transverse ligament and other supporting neck ligaments, when she slipped on a water spot in the kitchen of her apartment, causing her to fall backward and strike her head against a radiator. Plaintiff had notified defendant building owners of a water leak coming from the apartment above hers several days before the accident. Evidence at trial showed that as a result of the injury, inter alia, plaintiff was exposed to the possibility of quadriplegia and even death; she was placed in a painful, discomforting Gardner-Wells traction device for several days; she underwent major surgery to stabilize her neck by fusing together her vertebrae C1 through C4; she wore a heavy, uncomfortable extraction collar for one month following surgery, then a Philadelphia collar for three months, and then a neck brace for three years; she was permanently disabled; she experienced pain, restriction of movement, and feared exacerbating the injury; she was significantly affected in her daily activities; and she faced the likely prospect of additional major surgery on a developing spinal stenosis condition, as well as surgery on her shoulders, which were adversely affected by limited use. In view of the foregoing, the jury awards were inadequate to the extent indicated by the trial court (CPLR 5501[c]; cf., Hackworth v. WDW Dev., 224 A.D.2d 265, 637 N.Y.S.2d 720; Barrowman v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., 252 A.D.2d 946, 948, 675 N.Y.S.2d 734, lv. denied 92 N.Y.2d 817, 684 N.Y.S.2d 488, 707 N.E.2d 443).
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: December 21, 2000
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)