One of the threshold appellate jurisdictional requirements in New York practice is “aggrievement.”1 CPLR 5511 (“Permissible appellant and respondent”) provides that “[a]n aggrieved party or a person substituted for him may appeal from any appealable judgment or order except one entered upon the default of the aggrieved party” (emphasis added).
In Dudley v. Perkins,2 the Court of Appeals held that a party who stipulates to a conditional reduction or increase of damages in lieu of a new trial—the remittitur and additur procedures—is not aggrieved by that modification and may not appeal from it. For example, where a prevailing plaintiff stipulates to the entry of a judgment in an amount as reduced by the trial court, he is not an aggrieved party and may not raise by cross-appeal the issue of whether the trial court properly reduced the jury’s award.3 If the defendant appeals from the judgment, however, CPLR 5501(a)(5) confers jurisdiction on the Appellate Division to review the appropriateness of the remittitur and to reinstate part or all of the damage award.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
