The damage awards do not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation to a teenager for the loss of two gangrenous toes and part of the metatarsal head, with concomitant pain, permanent gait impairment, embarrassment and increased susceptibility to future arthritis and injury (CPLR 5501[c]; cf. Carl v. City of New York, 268 A.D.2d 395, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 704; Vasquez v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 266 A.D.2d 3; Dauria v. City of New York, 178 A.D.2d 289, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 751). We have considered defendants' other arguments, including that plaintiff's attorney exceeded the bounds of permissible questioning and argument, and find them unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.