 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Condon v. Hathaway3/19/2002
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Miscellaneous Reports.
(*1)
(*2) MEMORANDUM DECISION
(*3)
Defendant Dorothy S. Hathaway now seeks post-verdict relief in the above-entitled matter. In particular, she seeks to have this Court offset, pursuant to CPLR §4545, plaintiff's recovery by jury verdict for future medical expenses and/or lost wages to the extent of optional basic economic loss coverage in the amount of $25,000 available under a policy of automobile insurance issued to defendant Lois Pondolfino in whose (*4)automobile plaintiff was a passenger at the time she sustained injuries in the subject accident. Defendant Hathaway asserts that she is entitled to the same offset under CPLR §4545 with respect to the optional basic economic loss coverage as she is with the basic economic loss coverage.
Plaintiff, on the other hand, opposes defendant's post-verdict motion asserting that since the basic personal injury protection coverage is mandatory and the additional coverage is optional and for which a fee is paid reducing plaintiff's jury verdict recovery by the amount of the optional basic economic loss would result in unjust enrichment to the defendant tort feasor and a punishment to the plaintiff victim of such wrongdoing. Plaintiff also asserts that there is no guaranty that she will ever recover under the provisions of the optional basic loss coverage.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Plaintiff sustained personal injuries in a two-car motor vehicle accident which took place on April 13, 1999, in the County of Otsego, New York. Plaintiff's action for damages was tried before a jury in Otsego County for four days (September 17, 2001, through September 20, 2001). A trial jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff awarding $50,000 for past pain and suffering; $100,000 for future pain and suffering, including the permanency of the injury; $100,000 for future medical expenses and $25,000 for future lost earnings (from age 56 to age 65). Plaintiff was age 39 at the time of the jury verdict.
Both parties earlier moved for certain relief from various aspects of this jury (*5)verdict. This Court, by its written decision of October 26, 2001, denied post-verdict relief to each party.
In connection with the offsets required by CPLR §4545(c), these parties have agreed that the remaining balance of the applicable basic no-fault economic loss coverage be applied to reduce the plaintiff's recovery by jury verdict. Plaintiff had received $13,327 for basic economic loss sustained prior to the jury verdict. There then remained, at the time of the jury's verdict, basic economic loss coverage of $36,673. The parties have now agreed that plaintiff's future basic economic loss recovery by jury verdict be reduced by the remaining coverage available under the basic economic loss coverage.
What remains at issue between these parties concerns the question of whether the optional basic economic loss coverage purchased by defendant Pondolfino and in effect at the time of the accident in question covering plaintiff since she was a passenger in defendant Pondolfino's car should be applied to offset plaintiff's future damage recovery.
RELEVANT LAW/ANALYSIS
For decades, New York, like most jurisdictions, embraced the common law collateral source rule. The theory of the collateral source rule is that it was simply not fair for a negligent defendant to be permitted to reduce its liability in damages by showing that the plaintiff was already entitled to be reimbursed for such items as medical expenses and lost wages by a separate contract or other t
Page 1 2 3 4 New York Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|