Alferoff by Alferoff v. Casagrande by Casagrande

Decision Date21 July 1986
Parties, 33 Ed. Law Rep. 1206 Doris ALFEROFF, etc., et al., Respondents-Appellants, v. Michael CASAGRANDE, etc., et al., Defendants; The Roman Catholic Church of the Holy Name of Jesus School, etc., et al., Appellants-Respondents.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Amabile & Erman, Brooklyn (Frank Amabile, Steven DiJoseph and Charles F. McGuire, on brief), for appellants-respondents.

Morris J. Eisen, P.C. (Seligson, Rothman & Rothman, New York City [Martin S. Rothman, Joseph Napoli and Alyne I. Diamond], of counsel), for respondents-appellants.

Before BROWN, J.P., and WEINSTEIN, RUBIN and KOOPER, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants the Roman Catholic Church of the Holy Name of Jesus School and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn appeal from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bernstein, J.), entered April 24, 1985, as, upon a jury verdict on the issue of liability finding them 85% at fault in the happening of the accident and finding Michael Casagrande 15% at fault, and upon a jury verdict on the issue of damages, was in favor of the infant, plaintiff Doris Alferoff and against them in the principal amount of $650,000, and the infant plaintiff cross-appeals from so much of the same judgment as granted the posttrial motion of the appellants-respondents to set aside the verdict as to damages for diminution of earnings in the principal amount of $350,000.

Judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

We decline, on the record before us, to upset the liability verdict against the appellants-respondents inasmuch as liability may be imposed upon a school for the consequences of a foreseeable act by a third party (see, Ohman v. Board of Educ., 300 N.Y. 306, 309, 90 N.E.2d 474, rearg. denied 301 N.Y. 662, 93 N.E.2d 927). The infant plaintiff was injured attending classes in the defendant school, when an eraser thrown by another student struck her in the left eye, causing her permanent loss of vision in that eye as well as subsequent psychological trauma. The teacher at the time of the accident had temporarily stepped out of the classroom. The jury, on the facts presented at trial, could reasonably have found that the failure of the teacher to provide adequate supervision constituted negligence, and that such negligence constituted the proximate cause of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Earl v. Bouchard Transp. Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • April 24, 1990
    ...in the smaller number of employment options available to that person as a result of injury. But see Alferoff v. Casagrande, 122 A.D.2d 183, 504 N.Y.S.2d 719, 721 (2d Dep't 1986) (student may not recover for diminution of earning capacity in intended profession as cosmetologist since post-in......
  • LaPaglia v. Sears Roebuck and Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • August 15, 1988
    ...an award of $800,000 is appropriate ( see, Simon v. Sears Roebuck & Co., 124 A.D.2d 655, 508 N.Y.S.2d 39; Alferoff v. Casagrande, 122 A.D.2d 183, 504 N.Y.S.2d 719). We do not view the trial court's denial of the appellants' motion, made 17 months after entry of judgment, to vacate the judgm......
  • Merkley v. Palmyra-Macedon Cent. School Dist.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • May 22, 1987
    ...same time and failing to enforce the safety rules, proximately caused the injury is a question for the jury (see, Alferoff v. Casagrande, 122 A.D.2d 183, 184, 504 N.Y.S.2d 719; Sewar v. Gagliardi Bros. Serv., 69 A.D.2d 281, 289, 420 N.Y.S.2d 244, affd. 51 N.Y.2d 752, 432 N.Y.S.2d 367, 411 N......
  • Levine v. East Ramapo Cent. School Dist.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • April 29, 1993
    ...508 N.Y.S.2d 39; Goble v. State of New York, 123 A.D.2d 664, 507 N.Y.S.2d 35) or a permanent loss of vision (see, Alferoff v. Casagrande, 122 A.D.2d 183, 184, 504 N.Y.S.2d 719; cf., Koller v. Manhattan Eye, Ear & Throat Hosp., 168 A.D.2d 671, 672-673, 563 N.Y.S.2d 497 [permanent double visi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT