Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003

Calzado v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided April 10, 2003

304 A.D.2d 385; 758 N.Y.S.2d 303; 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3872

Cases that cite this one

20 later published cases cite this decision.

Aranda v. Foamex International d/b/a FXI, Inc. (District Court, D. New Mexico 2012)
Moctezuma v. New York City Tr. Auth. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2023)
Kopolovitch v. 200 Water SPE LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
Sermoneta v. New York City Transit Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
Reyes v. New York City Transit Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
Luna v. New York City Transit Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
Luna v. New York City Transit Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
Luna v. New York City Transit Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Luna v. New York City Transit Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Diaz v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
Smolinski v. Smolinski (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
Smith v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
Wilson v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
Lopez v. Consolidated Edison Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
Forman v. McFadden (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
Feliciano v. Ford Motor Credit Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
Hammond v. Welsh (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
Rodriguez v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)
1515 Summer St. Corp. v. Parikh (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)
Kircher v. Motel 6 G.P., Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (George Friedman, J., and a jury), entered on or about November 30, 2001, in an action for personal injuries sustained in a fall on a platform at the base of a set of steps leading up to an elevated subway station, apportioning liability 75% against defendant New York City Transit Authority and 25% against plaintiff, and awarding preapportionment, prestructured damages of, inter alia, $100,000 and $700,000 for past and future pain and suffering, respectively, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

While plaintiff’s attorney’s remarks on summation seeking to fashion a conspiracy to cover up the facts surrounding plaintiff's fall were deplorable, they did not warrant a mistrial and the trial court’s denial of such motion was a proper exercise of discretion. Plaintiff’s case was very strong, and we are satisfied that the net effect of counsel’s improper, but largely isolated, conspiracy allusion was minimal (compare Melendez v New York City Tr. Auth., 196 AD2d 460, 462 [1993]; Clarke v New York City Tr. Auth., 174 AD2d 268, 278 [1992]).

*386The award of $100,000 for past pain and suffering over a two-year period for a torn anterior cruciate ligament and a torn medial meniscus does not deviate materially from reasonable compensation (cf. Garcia v Queens Surface Corp., 271 AD2d 277, 278 [2000]; Myers v Schaffer Grocery Corp., 281 AD2d 156 [2001]; Lanpont v Savvas Cab Corp., 244 AD2d 208 [1997]). Likewise, in view of testimony that plaintiff will ultimately develop arthritis and require knee replacement surgery, the $700,000 award for future pain and suffering over a projected 32-year period is not so disproportionate to what constitutes reasonable compensation as to warrant reduction (cf. Mujica v State Univ. Constr. Fund, 275 AD2d 976 [2000]; Cruz v Manhattan & Bronx Surface Tr. Operating Auth., 259 AD2d 432 [1999]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Ellerin, Lerner and Marlow, JJ.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.