Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Simeon v. Urrey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided December 14, 2000Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partRose, J.

We respectfully dissent from that part of the majority’s decision reversing the jury’s award of no damages for future pain and suffering.

Plaintiff did not testify to any physical or emotional consequences resulting from her permanent scarring. Further, her own subjective testimony that her left arm is tender and aches under certain circumstances was contradicted by her orthopedic surgeon who read from the office notes of her final examination on January 3, 1997, nine months postaccident, that the metal plate permanently implanted in her left arm was completely nontender to touch. He confirmed…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Lolik v. Big v. Supermarkets, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1995
  2. People v. RoseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
  3. Brennan v. Bauman & Sons Buses, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
  4. Calabro v. Sun Oil Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API