1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.3d
  4. 102 A.D.3d
  5. 102 A.D.3d 465 (2013)
 

MATTER OF SEICKEL v. STATE INS. FUND

8978, 260476/11.

102 A.D.3d 465 (2013)

958 N.Y.S.2d 339

2013 NY Slip Op 126

In the Matter of ELIZABETH SEICKEL, Respondent, v. STATE INSURANCE FUND et al., Appellants.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.

Decided January 10, 2013.

Petitioner's projected future medical expenses are too speculative to be considered in calculating the total benefit to respondents from her recovery in the litigation (Matter of Bissell v Town of Amherst, 18 N.Y.3d 697 [2012]). Thus, respondents' equitable share of petitioner's litigation costs must be recalculated (see Burns v Varriale, 9 N.Y.3d 207, 215 n 4 [2007]).

We reject...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases