Figliomeni v. Board of Education of the City School District of Syracuse

38 N.Y.2d 178, 379 N.Y.S.2d 45, 341 N.E.2d 557 (1975)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Figliomeni v. Board of Education of the City School District of Syracuse

New York Court of Appeals
38 N.Y.2d 178, 379 N.Y.S.2d 45, 341 N.E.2d 557 (1975)

Facts

Rocco Figliomeni (plaintiff) was a 14-year-old student at a school operated by the Board of Education of the City School District of Syracuse (board) (defendant). Rocco was severely handicapped, possessing a low intelligence quotient and limited vision. Rocco was in a special class for children with severe problems. Joseph Gangemi (defendant) was one of Rocco’s teachers. Rocco was permitted limited physical activities, such as jumping and playing with a small, soft ball. Nevertheless, Gangemi, who had not reviewed Rocco’s health card, threw a hard baseball to Rocco that apparently struck Rocco in the head. Rocco subsequently suffered numerous maladies, including drowsiness from which he could not be aroused, a skull fracture that was discovered via surgery, a postoperative infection, and recurring epileptic seizures that prevented Rocco from being able to work. Rocco and his father, Frank Figliomeni (plaintiff), sued the board and Gangemi, seeking recovery for Rocco’s injuries and related damages. The jury, which the supreme court instructed to impose liability on Gangemi and the board for any medical malpractice that may have been committed by Rocco’s postaccident doctors, found in favor of Rocco and Frank, awarding Rocco $18,000 and a larger amount to Frank. The supreme court set aside the jury’s damages-award to Rocco as inadequate and ordered a new trial solely on damages. The board and Gangemi appealed, seeking a new trial regarding both liability and damages. The appellate division rejected the board and Gengemi’s contention. After a damages retrial without a jury, the supreme court awarded Rocco $125,000 in damages, which the appellate division increased to $175,000. The board and Gangemi appealed, reiterating their position that the second trial should have included liability.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Fuchsberg, J.)

Dissent (Cooke, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership