Legal Opinion
Damiano v. Exide Corp.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided June 24, 1997No. 92 Civ. 1395(LBS)PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION & ORDER
SAND, District Judge.
The matter before the Court entails conflicting views concerning how N.Y.C.P.L.R. Article 50-B should be applied to determine the sum of money ultimately to be paid to a plaintiff for future damages, an issue which has divided the lower courts and has not yet been definitively resolved by the New York Court of Appeals.
Plaintiff Richard Damiano (“Damiano”) moves pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) and C.P.L.R. § 5044 for an order modifying the August 12, 1996 judgment (the “Judgment”) issued in this case. Defendant Exide Corporation (“Exide”)…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Rohring v. City of Niagara FallsNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- Consorti v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
- In Re New York Asbestos LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1994
- Rohring v. City of Niagara FallsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Adamy v. ZiriakusAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Lamarca v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1999
- Bryant v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Estevez v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1999
- Fisk v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Gravatt v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1999
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.