several court orders directing compliance. One of those requirements was to produce “a witness with knowledge of the facts.” Consequently, the answer now stands stricken under CPLR 3126(3).
The infant plaintiff in Delgado v. Murrray, 2014 NY Slip Op 01416 (1st Dep’t 3/4/14) suffered Erb’s Palsy as a result of defendant’s malpractice during his delivery. Though showing no difference in arm strength between right and left, there is a difference in arm length (3/4”) which will continue to grow and may require future surgery. The 1st Dep’t affirms $20K for past, but only half of the $600K the jury awarded for future pain and suffering (over 20 years.) Also affirmed was the verdict of $380K for future lost earnings over 38 years.
Unfortunately, in Molina v. NYTCA, 2014 NY Slip Op 01415 (1st Dep’t 3/4/14), the court affirms an award of $600 past and reduces an award of $1.3MM for future pain and suffering (over 27 years) to $800K, for a slip and fall on subway stair debris, where defendants could not produce a cleaning schedule or anyone who had followed it. So, why “unfortunately?” Because, once again, the Appellate Division fails to specify any injuries in the decision, making it a private ruling and thus useless to most practitioners.