A party's right to a direct appeal from an interlocutory order lapses upon the entry of a final judgment (Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 248;Bingham v. Struve, 245 A.D.2d 154, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 807). A final judgment was entered in this matter following the post-trial order from which defendant purports to appeal, and it is undisputed that defendant has not filed a timely notice of appeal from such judgment.
In any event, even if the appealed order were reviewable, we would find no merit to defendant's substantive contentions. The trial evidence showed that plaintiff sustained serious injuries to his hip, back and spine by reason of the construction site accident giving rise to this lawsuit. In view of the gravity of plaintiff's injuries, a total award of $2 million, as reduced by the trial court from $4 million, for past and future pain and suffering does not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation. The evidence demonstrated that plaintiff faces a lifetime of constant pain and severe physical limitations only partially relievable by future medical procedures such as spinal fusion surgery and hip replacement (see, Vasquez v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., 266 A.D.2d 3;Cruz v. Manhattan Bronx Surface Tr. Operating Auth., 259 A.D.2d 432;Wyatt v. State of New York, 227 A.D.2d 283, lv dismissed in part and denied in part 89 N.Y.2d 1028). Finally, the awards for future economic loss and future medical expenses are amply supported by testimonial and/or documentary evidence, largely unrefuted, at trial.