Case Name: James Murray, Respondent, v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2004-01-12
Citations: 3 A.D.3d 479
Docket Number: 
Parties: James Murray, Respondent, v Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 3
Pages: 479–480

Head Matter:
James Murray, Respondent, v Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Appellant.
[769 NYS2d 756]

Opinion:
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kangs County (Jones, J.), entered November 19, 2002, as, upon a jury verdict on the issue of damages only, is in favor of the plaintiff and against it in the principal sums of $200,000 for past pain and suffering and $250,000 for future pain and suffering.
Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the facts, by deleting the provision thereof awarding the plaintiff damages for future pain and suffering, and a new trial is granted only on the issue of those damages; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the defendant, unless within 30 days after service upon the plaintiff of a copy of this decision and order he shall serve and file in the office of the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Kings County, a written stipulation consenting to decrease the verdict as to damages for future pain and suffering from the principal sum of $250,000 to the principal sum of $200,000, and to the entry of an appropriate amended judgment accordingly; in the event that the plaintiff so stipulates, then the judgment, as so reduced and amended, is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.
The proof was sufficient to sustain the jury's verdict for past pain and suffering in the sum of $200,000. However, the verdict for future pain and suffering was excessive to the extent indicated herein (see CPLR 5501 [c]; Madrit v City of New York, 210 AD2d 459 [1994]; see also Condor v City of New York, 292 AD2d 332 [2002]). Florio, J.P., Smith, Luciano and Rivera, JJ., concur.