N.Y. Court Upholds $21 Million Vicarious Liability Award

November 22, 2005

Separate emails using a comma.

The New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, has awarded $21 million to an accident victim, setting what is believed to be a record $8 million for future pain and suffering.

The case could also be one of the last vicarious liability cases that will be heard against a car leasing firm because the federal highway act repealed the state law this past summer.

The case involved a 25-year-old pedestrian who was rendered a paraplegic when struck down in Manhattan in an accident caused by a Budget Rent A Car in November 2000.

The plaintiff was represented by Kreindler & Kreindler LLP of New York. The case was tried in New York County by Marc S. Moller and David C. Cook of Kreindler.

In January 2005, Supreme Court trial judge Milton A. Tingling
Jr., JSC, upheld $20.3 million of a $24.5 million December 2003 jury verdict, one of the highest such verdicts ever returned and affirmed in New York State.

The appeal was argued before the Appellate Court on October 27, 2005.

“This may be the last of the vicarious liability cases holding rental car companies responsible for the negligence of their operators, as the law of vicarious liability was revoked in August by the Federal Government’s passage of the Graves Amendment to the Federal Transportation Funding bill,” noted Cook.

Separate emails using a comma.
Subscribe Insurance news headlines delivered to your email.
Get a free subscription to our popular email newsletter.

Latest Comments

  • November 28, 2005 at 4:12 am
    Sully says:
    Is it me or is this entire country going to the dogs (attorneys)? Granted that what happened to the victim is awful, however awful accidents happen everyday and aren\'t the r... read more
  • November 28, 2005 at 4:06 am
    Mad Dog says:
    While you\'re at it why not fix the Labor Law problem too. Two great examples of the type of legislation that is dragging New York State down the tubes. Start a business or mo... read more
  • November 28, 2005 at 1:24 am
    Benzer says:
    Your comment is straight to the point..Why should a rental company be stuck paying for what it\'s renter did? All they did was rent the car to the person. The law (penned in ... read more
See all comments

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

More News
More News Features