From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tejeda v. 116 West Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 2, 2002
293 A.D.2d 261 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

640-641

April 2, 2002.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J. and a jury), entered January 12, 2001, in an action for personal injuries caused by lead paint poisoning, in favor of plaintiff and against defendants-appellants, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

RICHARD H. BLISS, for plaintiffs-respondents.

STEVE S. EFRON, for defendants-appellants.

Before: Saxe, J.P., Buckley, Sullivan, Rosenberger, Ellerin, JJ.


We reject defendants' claim that the trial court erred as a matter of law in holding them responsible for all of plaintiff's damages rather than allowing the jury to decide their share of the damages based on the uncontested periods of time that they respectively owned the building in which plaintiff's injuries were sustained. There is no evidence to support a non-speculative apportionment on this basis (see, La Fountaine v. Franzese, 282 A.D.2d 935, 938; cf., Ravo v. Rogatnick, 70 N.Y.2d 305, 312). We have considered defendants' other arguments, including that their cross-examination of plaintiff's expert was unfairly curtailed, and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Tejeda v. 116 West Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 2, 2002
293 A.D.2d 261 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Tejeda v. 116 West Corp.

Case Details

Full title:ALEX TEJEDA, a/k/a ALEX MORALES, ETC., ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Apr 2, 2002

Citations

293 A.D.2d 261 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
739 N.Y.S.2d 269

Citing Cases

D.V. v. 997 Hart St.

Indeed, D .V. had substantially higher blood lead levels post-notice than he had prenotice. Thus, due to the…