Torts · MBE-tested

Richard Udland, Respondent, v. Michael Naimet et al., Appellants

234 A.D.2d 449651 N.Y.S.2d 896·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1996·NY

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

Richard Udland, Respondent, v Michael Naimet et al., Appellants. [651 NYS2d 896] [MAJORITY] —In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Owen, J.), entered August 15, 1995, which, upon a jury verdict after a trial on the issue of damages only, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $650,000. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs. In this rear-end collision case in which negligence was conceded, we find that the plaintiff established that the accident was a proximate cause of his injuries (see, Deridarian v Felix Contr. Corp., 51 NY2d 308), and that the damages award was supported by credible evidence (see, Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 133; Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 498-499). The defendants’ remaining contentions are either unpreserved for our review or without merit. Miller, J. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Santucci, JJ., concur.