Case Name: Christina Milbrandt, as Administratrix of the Estate of Irving C. Milbrandt, Deceased, Appellant-Respondent, v. A. P. Green Refractories Company, Respondent-Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1990-11-16
Citations: 167 A.D.2d 845
Docket Number: Appeal No. 2
Parties: Christina Milbrandt, as Administratrix of the Estate of Irving C. Milbrandt, Deceased, Appellant-Respondent, v A. P. Green Refractories Company, Respondent-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 167
Pages: 845–846

Head Matter:
Christina Milbrandt, as Administratrix of the Estate of Irving C. Milbrandt, Deceased, Appellant-Respondent, v A. P. Green Refractories Company, Respondent-Appellant.
(Appeal No. 2.)

Opinion:
Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and motion denied. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred by reducing the judgment to eliminate interest assessed on the future damages. The statute (EPTL 5-4.3 [a]) clearly provides that "[ijnterest upon the principal sum recovered by the plaintiff from the date of the decedent's death shall be added to and be a part of the total sum awarded." The plain meaning of the statute provides for interest on the "principal sum recovered" without distinguishing between prejudgment and postjudgment losses of future income (Soulier v Hughes, 119 AD2d 951, 954). We recognize that the rationale in Woodling v Garrett Corp. (813 F2d 543) has merit. Any inequity, however, which may result from compliance with the statute is a matter for the Legislature and not for the courts. (Appeals from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Feeman, J.—correction of judgment.) Present—Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Boomer, Green and Balio, JJ.