Gallo v. Supermarkets General Corp.
| Citation | 491 N.Y.S.2d 796,112 A.D.2d 345 |
| Parties | Paul GALLO, et al., Respondents, v. SUPERMARKETS GENERAL CORP., et al., Appellants; I. Sideris Company, Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. |
| Decision Date | 22 July 1985 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Anthony J. DeMarco, Jr., P.C., Brooklyn, for appellants Sheradell Realty Corp. and Sherilu Const. Corp.
Richard A. Scheer, New York City (Stephen A. Weinstein and Kathleen M. Barrett, New York City, of counsel), for appellant J.L.F. Contracting Corp.
Gladstein & Isaac, New York City (Arthur N. Seiff and Allen H. Isaac, New York City, of counsel), for appellant Supermarkets General Corp.
Reichenbaum & Silberstein, Great Neck (Jerome D. Silberstein and Meryl R. Neuren, Great Neck, of counsel), for respondents Paul Gallo and Nancy Gallo.
Helfenstein & Matza, New York City (Hugh J. Helfenstein and Morris E. Matza, New York City, of counsel), for third-party defendant-respondent.
Before THOMPSON, J.P., and NIEHOFF, RUBIN and KUNZEMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., defendant Supermarkets General Corp. and defendants-third party plaintiffs Sheradell Realty Corp., Sherilu Construction Corp., and J.L.F. Contracting Corp. appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered February 28, 1984, which, upon a jury verdict, was (1) in favor of plaintiff Paul Gallo and against them in the principal amount of $1,710,380; (2) in favor of plaintiff Nancy Gallo and against the same defendants in the principal amount of $500,000; and (3) in favor of third-party defendant I. Sideris Co. and against third-party plaintiffs Sheradell Realty Corp., Sherilu Construction Corp. and J.L.F. Construction Corp. on their third-party complaint.
Judgment modified, on the facts, by deleting therefrom the provision awarding plaintiff Nancy Gallo the principal amount of $500,000, and substituting therefor a provision severing the action as against her and granting the defendants in the main action a new trial on the issue of her damages, unless she serves and files in the office of the Clerk of the Supreme Court, Kings County, a written stipulation consenting to reduce the verdict in her favor to the principal amount of $300,000, and to the entry of an appropriate amended judgment. As so modified, judgment affirmed, with costs to the plaintiffs. Plaintiff Nancy Gallo's time to serve and file the aforementioned stipulation is extended until 20 days after the service upon her of a copy of the order to be made hereon, with notice of entry. In the event that plaintiff Nancy Gallo so stipulates, then the judgment, as so reduced and amended, is affirmed, with costs to the plaintiffs.
Plaintiff Paul Gallo, a young man in his twenties, was severely injured when a "tar lugger" containing hot tar expelled its contents onto him at a jobsite. The record reveals that he suffered extensive third degree burns over a significant portion of his body, including his face, head, neck, chest, arms and waist. The injuries resulted in his hospitalization for nearly two months, during which time he was subjected to painful procedures including debridement, skin grafting, and the removal of 75% of his right ear. The facial scars are permanent and extremely disfiguring. In addition, his eyelids and tear ducts no longer function properly. Were he to undergo further plastic surgery, the necessary procedures would take more than five years to complete, would involve major surgery, and still would not completely restore his appearance. There was also uncontradicted testimony that the injuries have resulted in severe psychological and mental problems for this plaintiff, resulting in his inability to work, fear of contact with people, fear of hot liquids, and his inability to look at himself in the mirror. In short, this formerly healthy, athletic, social, confident and helpful young man has now become a virtual recluse, who can no longer lead a normal life. In fact, the psychiatrist who testified at trial opined that Mr. Gallo would need 10 years of psychotherapy on a regular basis, and, thereafter, continued contacts, on an irregular basis.
In light of the above, it cannot be said that the award of $1,400,000 for this plaintiff's pain and suffering was excessive (Rush v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 92 A.D.2d 1072, 461 N.Y.S.2d 559), nor can the monetary award for future medical expenses be upset on this basis. A plastic surgeon, Dr. Fischman, testified at trial that the major procedures would cost approximately $40,000 at present prices, and that further procedures would be required in order to revise the scarring produced by the initial procedures, as well as to address the lesser deformities. As has already been indicated, another doctor testified that Mr. Gallo would require weekly psychotherapy for a period of approximately 10 years, and, thereafter, continuing treatment on an irregular basis. He...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sales v. Republic of Uganda, 90 Civ. 3972 (CSH).
...where her fractured ankle resulted in permanent damage and pain and required amputation of two toes); Gallo v. Supermarkets General Corp., 112 A.D.2d 345, 491 N.Y.S.2d 796 (2d Dep't), appeal denied, 66 N.Y.2d 605, 498 N.Y.S.2d 1025, 489 N.E.2d 770 (1985) (Appellate Division finds $300,000 p......
-
Andrulonis v. US
...v. Garber, 73 N.Y.2d 246, 253-57, 538 N.Y.S.2d 937, 939-41, 536 N.E.2d 372, 374-76 (1989); see Gallo v. Supermarkets General Corp., 112 A.D.2d 345, 346-47, 491 N.Y.S.2d 796, 798 (2d Dept.1985). Recovery for this latter aspect of pain and suffering, referred to as the "loss of enjoyment of l......
-
Rimoldi v. Schanzer
...Inc., 18 A.D.2d 39, 238 N.Y.S.2d 263; Blackwood v. Chemical Corn Exchange Bank, 4 A.D.2d 656, 168 N.Y.S.2d 335; Gallo v. Supermarkets Gen. Corp., 112 A.D.2d 345, 491 N.Y.S.2d 796). In the situation at bar, we agree with the Supreme Court's determination that, at the very least, an issue of ......
-
Papa v. City of New York
...v. City of New York, 121 A.D.2d 489, 503 N.Y.S.2d 818; People v. Manor, 116 A.D.2d 921, 498 N.Y.S.2d 223; Gallo v. Supermarkets Gen. Corp., 112 A.D.2d 345, 348, 491 N.Y.S.2d 796). We note that only two of the Trial Justice's inquiries complained of on appeal were timely objected to by defen......
-
Judicial conduct
...or expediting the orderly progress of a trial. The judge’s conduct demonstrated no bias. Gallo v. Supermarkets General Corp. , 112 A.D.2d 345, 491 N.Y.S.2d 796 (2d Dept. 1985). In a case involving injury sustained by a tarlugger, it was proper for the court to take an active role and questi......
-
Judicial conduct
...facilitating or expediting the orderly progress of a trial. The judge’s conduct demonstrated no bias. Gallo v. Supermarkets Gen. Corp. , 112 A.D.2d 345, 491 N.Y.S.2d 796 (2d Dept. 1985). In a case involving injury sustained by a tarlugger, it was proper for the court to take an active role ......
-
Photographs, recordings, & x-rays
...would have aided the jury in assessing pain and suffering and in understanding medical testimony. Gallo v. Supermarkets General Corp., 112 A.D.2d 345, 491 N.Y.S.2d 796 (2d Dept. 1985). Photographs of an injured party taken while undergoing hospital treatment were admissible during the damag......
-
Photographs, recordings, & x-rays
...would have aided the jury in assessing pain and sufering and in understanding medical testimony. Gallo v. Supermarkets General Corp. , 112 A.D.2d 345, 491 N.Y.S.2d 796 (2d Dept. 1985). Photographs of an injured party taken while undergoing hospital treatment were admissible during the damag......