Justice York ordered the N.Y. Lounge Group to pay $7,500 to attorney Lori Sullivan as a sanction for having frivolously sued her. Sullivan, however, only asked for $3,600. In the absence of any word from York about why he gave her a big bonus, that is all she should get, said the appellate court in N.Y. Lounge Group, LLC v. Sullivan (October 24).

Justice Acosta awarded nearly $35,000 in attorney’s fees to Morris E. Matza along with just over $16,000 that he won in an arbitration against his own law firm, Oshman, Helfenstein & Matza. Trouble is, Matza never clearly requested attorney’s fees. In that case, the standard practice in arbitration proceedings should have applied, leaving the parties stuck with their own costs, the appellant judges said in Matter of Matza v. Oshman, Helfenstein & Matza (October 24).

OTHER NEW YORK COUNTY MATTERS

The ball bearings of a tilting steam kettle hadn’t been lubricated in years, contrary to directions on a metal plate affixed to the side of the implement. Justice Carol Edmead thought the kettle maker should remain on the hook anyhow, after a defendant in the lawsuit filed by kitchen workers was injured by boiling water when the pot tipped over. The appellate department dismissed the manufacturer from the case, explaining in Aparicio v. Acme American Repair, Inc. (October 19) that there was no evidence the accident would have happened if the kettle had been maintained as directed.

Justice Richard B. Lowe III dismissed a complaint because the plaintiff’s lawyers failed to appear for a status conference. That was much too harsh a sanction, said the appellate department in American Audio Service Bureau Inc. v. AT & T Corp. (October 19), particularly since the plaintiff, contrary to Lowe’s assertion, had not made a habit of missing filing deadlines or appearances.

Justice Alan C. Marin agreed with two lost-wage experts that Man-Kit Lei would have earned $850,920 more in his lifetime if he hadn’t been severely burned in a welding accident in a college sculpture class. The appellate judges thought the expert testimony was mostly smoke and mirrors. In Man-Kit Lei v. City University of New York (October 19), the appellate panel agreed that the jury’s $5 million award to Lei for pain and suffering was reasonable. But the lost-wage experts pulled their numbers out of thin air and didn’t bother to focus on Lei’s specific aptitudes and interests when estimating which jobs he might have filled and at what rates of pay. He wanted to be a sculptor before the accident and is a sculptor now, with pieces for sale in local galleries, the appellate court observed.

After a jury trial, Justice William A. Wetzel entered a judgment convicting Robert Cumberland of sex crimes and kidnapping counts. The appellate division vacated the kidnapping counts, explaining in People v. Cumberland (October 19) that those offenses merged with the underlying acts of rape and sodomy. That didn’t change the bottom line. Cumberland was left with the same aggregate term as a second violent felony offender of 175 to 185 years in prison.

The appellate panel in People v. Green (October 19) told Justice Ronald A. Zweibel that he should have given James Green a hearing on the purely factual issue of whether or not the security guard involved in his detention was licensed to exercise police powers or was acting as an agent of the police. The appellate court remanded the case for that purpose.

Justice Philip M. Grella sentenced Arnold Stapleton to three-and-half to seven years in prison for first-degree criminal contempt. The appellate division, however, found that the evidence didn’t add up to a first-degree offense because Stapleton wasn’t charged with violating any of the types of protective orders listed in the criminal-contempt statute. In People v. Stapleton (October 19), the appellate panel reduced Stapleton’s conviction to a second-degree offense and sliced his prison term to a year.

Justice Herman Cahn shorted tenants for five-and-a-half years’ worth of interest on money due from the losing landlord in a rent control proceeding, said the appellate division in Matter of Ellison v. New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal (October 19).

Justice Paul G. Feinman thought the city might be at least partly responsible for on-the-job injuries sustained by firefighter Dennis Amodio because the city had a hand in selecting the boots that apparently malfunctioned. But the appellate division, in Amodio v. City of New York (October 19), noted that municipal defendants generally can’t be sued for damages for the injurious consequences of official actions involving the exercise of discretion of judgment--such as task of selecting firefighting equipment.

Justice Joan B. Lobis allowed Lora Kojovic to reopen divorce proceedings against her ex-husband, Neal Goldman, because slightly more than one month after execution of the settlement agreement giving her $1.5 million, a company in which he had a minor stake was sold, netting him $18 million. The appellate panel wasn’t willing to give Kojovic a second bite at the apple, explaining in Kojovic v. Goldman (October 19), that she got more than peanuts for a six-year childless marriage. Besides, she and her experienced attorney had been duly informed of the husband’s interest in the company and they could have made a better effort of valuing it.


BRONX COUNTY

Justice Douglas McKeon correctly found that the owner of a liposuction clinic was vicariously liable for at least part of the damages for patient Joel Cunninghman’s death, which occurred because the doctors participating in the surgery lacked an instrument that could have resolved breathing problems caused by anesthesia. But the $5 million punitive damage award approved by McKeon was excessive, said the appellate division in Brown v. LaFontaine-Rish Medical Association (October 19). Four of the five judges on the appellate panel voted to cut the award in half. The dissenting judge said that even at $2.5 million, the award was excessive, given the small share of blame that could fairly be assigned to the clinic owner for the surgeon’s and anesthesiologist’s malpractice.


KINGS COUNTY

Justice Leon Ruchelsman dismissed a complaint on the grounds that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury. The doctor’s reports presented by the defendant, however, did not explain what objective testing they performed to reach that conclusion, so the complaint should not have been dismissed, the appellate department concluded in Agathe v. Tun Chen Wang (October 17).

Yisroel Sprung swore that he never was served with a copy of the complaint that led to the loss of his property in a foreclosure sale, and according to the appellate division, he was entitled to a hearing on the issue. Justice Martin Schneier had brushed aside Sprung’s assertion and granted the foreclosure judgment, earning a reversal from an appellate panel in Elm Management Corp. v. Sprung (October 17). The court sent the case back to Schneier for a hearing on whether Sprung was ever properly served.

Justice Louis Marrero concluded that Duane Middleton is a level-two sex offender, but Marrerro didn’t explain which risk assessment instrument he used and which factors he considered in reaching that determination. In People v. Middleton (October 17), the appellate court sent the case back for a new hearing and a better explanation of the result.


QUEENS COUNTY

Justice Thomas Polizzi believed the scuttlebutt about how Luis Guaman was a reckless worker who ignored safety instructions. Accordingly, Polizzi denied the worker’s motion for summary judgment in his suit over the injuries he sustained when he fell from a ladder that was perched on scaffolding while installing air conditioning ducts in the roof of a church. The appellate division pronounced the scuttlebutt inadmissible hearsay. Since the church didn’t explain what safety equipment was on hand that Guaman had refused to use, they should not have been allowed by Polizzi to invoke the “recalcitrant worker” defense. The appellate division, in Guaman v. New Sprout Presbyterian Church (October 17), granted Guaman’s motion for summary judgment on liability against the church.

Justice Arnold Price will probably pay closer attention from now on to complaints about water bills. He was reversed in two separate cases last week for denying petitions to review rate decisions of the New York City Water Board. In Matter of 38 Park Avenue Association LLC v. Tweedy (October 17), the appellate judges said Price should have given the petitioners a hearing on whether the amended rate schedule was reasonable and complied with due process requirements. And in Matter of Amalgamated Warbasse Houses, Inc. v. Tweedy (October 17), they said Price improperly denied the petitioners' appeals seeking reductions in charges on water and wastewater.

Justice Price got reversed in yet another case involving a dispute title. He ruled that Rita Mallick couldn’t contest Napoleon Farfan’s title to a house on 44th Avenue in Corona because Rene Rivera, who allegedly transferred the house to Mallick, had lost her claim to the house in a suit brought by Farfan. The appellate division, however, noted in Mallick v. Farfan (October 17) that Rivera allegedly transferred the house to Mallick before Farfan filed his suit. So the outcome of that case had no bearing on Mallick’s right to proceed with a suit of her own against Farfan.

Take away the hearsay statements against the juvenile identified in the case of Jamel E., and there is not enough evidence left to prove that he stole a car, the appellate division found in Matter of Jamel E. (October 17). So Justice Fran Lubow should not have adjudicated him a delinquent and ordered him held in a juvenile facility for 18 months.

In a complicated case of first impression pitting condominium owners against condo converters and operators, Justice Patricia P. Satterfield dismissed all of the causes of action brought by the owners. She should have let at least some of the claims make it to trial, the appellate division concluded in an 11,000-word treatise on the legal issues at stake, Caprer v. Nussbaum (October 17).