After a review of the record, the damages appear to us to be excessive to the extent indicated. Plaintiff suffered a torn meniscus and cartilage damage when, in an automobile accident, both knees struck the dashboard of her vehicle. Notwithstanding the prospect for bilateral knee replacements, plaintiff did not suffer any loss of time at work or cessation of normal activities, although she did impose limits. The arthroscopic procedure to which she submitted and her prognosis support an award of $600,000, rather than the $1.2 million apportioned by the jury, for pain and suffering, when compared to awards for similar injuries (see, Menga v. Raquet, 150 A.D.2d 434; Tejada v City of New York, 129 A.D.2d 697; Holshek v. Stokes, 122 A.D.2d 777).
We find the award of $300,000 for future medical expenses does not deviate materially "from what would be reasonable compensation" (CPLR 5501 [c]).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Asch, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.