# Rush v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.

> Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · March 31, 1983 · 92 A.D.2d 1072

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5860701

## Case

- **Full name:** Lloyd T. Rush, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Bobbie J. Rush, and as Parent and Natural Guardian of Donna Rush, Formerly an Infant v. Sears, Roebuck and Company
- **Court:** Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- **Decided:** March 31, 1983
- **Citations:** 92 A.D.2d 1072; 461 N.Y.S.2d 559; 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17472
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Sweeney
- **Judges:** Sweeney
- **Cited by:** 21 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5860701

## Opinion text

Sweeney, J.,
concurs in part and dissents in part in the following memorandum. Sweeney, J. (concurring in part and dissenting in part). I regret that I am unable to fully agree with the result reached by the majority. While my disagreement is a narrow one, it is, I believe, significant, necessitating a brief explanation. Where, as here, the court is to sustain the verdict on the issues of liability but concludes that the verdict is excessive and recommends a 62% reduction in the damages, I am of the view that the better procedure is to remand for retrial on the question of damages. To adopt the majority’s method unfairly deprives plaintiff Donna Rush of her entitlement to a jury assessment of damages.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5860701. Public record. Not legal advice.