Arlotta v. J & J Equipment Rental Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Arlotta v. J & J Equipment Rental Corp.

245 A.D.2d 478, 666 N.Y.S.2d 39, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13281

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 22, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 245 A.D.2d 478 (Arlotta v. J & J Equipment Rental Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Arlotta v. J & J Equipment Rental Corp., 245 A.D.2d 478, 666 N.Y.S.2d 39, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13281 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the third-party defendant, New York Paving, Inc., s/h/a New York Paving Company, Inc., appeals from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Belen, J.), dated November 12, 1996, as, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the third-party plaintiff, J & J Equipment Rental Corp., and against it in the principal sum of $760,236.30.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the plaintiffs-respondents.

Contrary to the appellant’s contention the court properly denied its motion to set aside the verdict as against the weight of the evidence as it was supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Lolik v Big V Supermarkets, 86 NY2d 744). Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein and Lerner, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the third-party defendant, New York Paving, Inc., s/h/a New York Paving Company, Inc., appeals from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Belen, J.), dated November 12, 1996, as, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the third-party plaintiff, J & J Equipment Rental Corp., and against it in the principal sum of $760,236.30.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the plaintiffs-respondents.

Contrary to the appellant’s contention the court properly denied its motion to set aside the verdict as against the weight of the evidence as it was supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Lolik v Big V Supermarkets, 86 NY2d 744). Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Goldstein and Lerner, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

245 A.D.2d 478, 666 N.Y.S.2d 39, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13281, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arlotta-v-j-j-equipment-rental-corp-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack