AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

FA-SHUN OU, ETC., ET AL., respondents, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, ET AL., appellants.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the appeal from the judgment entered August 15, 2002, is dismissed, as it was superseded by the amended judgment entered September 10, 2002; and it is further,

ORDERED that the amended judgment is modified by deleting the provision thereof awarding "interest at the rate of nine percent (3%) per annum," and substituting therefor a provision awarding "interest at the rate of three percent (3%) per annum;" as so modified, the amended judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs' decedent died as a result of being struck by a bus owned and operated by the defendants. Contrary to the defendants' contention, the plaintiffs met their "burden of proving consciousness for at least some period of time following an accident in order to justify an award of damages for pain and suffering" ( Cummins v. County of Onondaga, 84 N.Y.2d 322, 324; see McDougald v. Garber, 73 N.Y.2d 246; Fiederlein v. New York City Health Hosps. Corp., 56 N.Y.2d 573; cf. Cleary v. LJR Assocs., 198 A.D.2d 394) . Furthermore, the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence since it was based on a fair interpretation of the evidence ( see Nicastro v. Park, 113 A.D.2d 129).

The amended judgment contains what appears to be a typographical error in that it recites that the judgment shall bear "interest at the rate of nine percent (3%) per annum." The parties concede that the correct rate of interest is three per cent per annum ( see Public Authorities Law § 1212; Klos v. New York City Tr. Auth., 240 A.D.2d 635). Accordingly, we modify the amended judgment to reflect the proper rate of interest.

The defendants' remaining contentions are without merit.

SANTUCCI, J.P., KRAUSMAN, SCHMIDT and RIVERA, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

OU v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY
(Oct 14, 2003)