Citation Numbers: 255 A.D.2d 242, 680 N.Y.S.2d 501, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12717
Filed Date: 11/24/1998
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/1/2024
—Judgment, Supreme
The missing witness instruction was warranted since defendants did not demonstrate that the physicians who had examined plaintiffs on defendants’ behalf were unavailable, or that their testimony would be cumulative (see, People v Gonzalez, 68 NY2d 424, 427). In addition, since the record supports the trial court’s implicit determination that this case involved “serious injury” as a matter of law, the court’s failure to charge as to the no-fault threshold was not erroneous. Finally, in light of the evidence indicating that the 31-year-old plaintiff would suffer substantial pain from her back injuries, which injuries include one herniated and four bulging discs, the award to her of $175,000 for future pain and suffering did not deviate from reasonable compensation under the circumstances (see, Skow v Jones, Lang & Wooton Corp., 240 AD2d 194). Concur — Lerner, P. J., Williams, Tom and Andrias, JJ.