Rosenblyum v. Liberty Sorting, Inc., 261 A.D.2d 466 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999). · Go Syfert
Search
Rosenblyum v. Liberty Sorting, Inc., 261 A.D.2d 466 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Firmes v. Chase Manhattan Automotive Finance Corp.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2008 · confidence medium
This Court, in affirming the Supreme Court’s denial of a collateral source hearing, noted that the defendants’ motion for a hearing was not supported by “any competent evidence” that past economic loss should be reduced (see Rosenblyum v Liberty Sorting, 261 AD2d 466, 466 [1999]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Victor Rosenblyum
v.
Liberty Sorting, Inc., (And Other Titles.)
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
May 10, 1999.
261 A.D.2d 466
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Shaw, J.), dated January 21, 1998, which denied the defendant’s motion, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR 4545 (c) to reduce the jury’s award of damages to the plaintiff for past economic loss.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In support of their motion, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR 4545 (c), the appellants failed to proffer any competent evidence that the jury’s award of damages to the plaintiff for past economic loss should be reduced due to compensation for the same injuries already received by him from a collateral source (see, Faas v State of New York, 249 AD2d 731; Adamy v Ziriakus, 231 AD2d 80, affd 92 NY2d 396). Thus, that branch of the appellants’ motion was properly denied.

[*467] The appellants’ remaining contentions are either improperly raised for the first time on appeal or without merit. O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Joy, Altman and Smith, JJ., concur.