Silvestri v. Smallberg, 671 N.E.2d 1267 (N.Y. 1996). · Go Syfert
Search
Silvestri v. Smallberg, 671 N.E.2d 1267 (N.Y. 1996). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
13 citation events across 5 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Damiano v. Exide Corp. (nysd, 1997-06-24)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Damiano v. Exide Corp.
S.D.N.Y. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See id., 630 N.Y.S.2d at 643-14 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Bermeo v. Yucel Atakent
N.Y. App. Div. · 1998 · signal: see also · confidence low
Attorneys fees, though, should be apportioned among different parts of the award, so that “each portion of counsel fees [may] be paid out of the corresponding portion of the verdict upon which the particular portion of the fee is based” (Reed v Harter Chair Corp., supra, at 125 [3d Dept 1994]; see also, Silvestri v Smallberg, 165 Misc 2d 827 , affd 224 AD2d 172 , affd 88 NY2d 1004 ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Anthony Silvestri, Respondent,
v.
Gerald J. Smallberg, Appellant
New York Court of Appeals.
Sep 12, 1996.
671 N.E.2d 1267
1996 N.Y. LEXIS 2722
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, Kenneth Mauro, Great Neck, for appellant., Warner & Joselson, New York City (Jonathon D. Warner of counsel) for respondent.
Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick Concur.
Cited by 7 opinions  |  Published

[*1005] OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

The issue presented in this action to recover damages for medical malpractice is whether postjudgment interest accrues on awards for future damages when such awards are paid in a structured judgment pursuant to CPLR 50-A. We answer this question in the affirmative. The Court’s decision in Rohring v City of Niagara Falls (84 NY2d 60) is controlling here. The underlying rationale of Rohring — that a defendant is liable for the full amount of the judgment at the time of the verdict and that the structured payment provisions of CPLR articles 50-A and 50-B do not delay liability, but merely make payment of the judgment incremental (see, 84 NY2d, at 69-70) — applies with equal force to postjudgment interest under CPLR 5003 as it does to postverdict interest under CPLR 5002. The difference in statutory language between sections 5002 and 5003 does not require a contrary result.

We have examined defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.