Cashwell v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cashwell v. City of New York

281 A.D.2d 444, 721 N.Y.S.2d 556, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2383

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 12, 2001·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant City of New York appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.), entered October 21, 1999, which, upon denying its motions pursuant to CPLR 4401 made at the close of the evidence to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it, and upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiff and against it in the principal sum of $316,000.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court correctly denied the motions of the defendant City of New York to dismiss for failure to make out a prima facie case. Whether a municipality failed to remove snow within a reasonable period of time is a question for the fact-finder (see, Gonzalez v City of New York, 148 AD2d 668, 670). The evidence before the jury was sufficient for it to rationally find in the plaintiff’s favor (see, Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 499). Friedmann, J. P., Florio, Luciano and Feuerstein, 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, the defendant City of New York appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.), entered October 21, 1999, which, upon denying its motions pursuant to CPLR 4401 made at the close of the evidence to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it, and upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiff and against it in the principal sum of $316,000.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court correctly denied the motions of the defendant City of New York to dismiss for failure to make out a prima facie case. Whether a municipality failed to remove snow within a reasonable period of time is a question for the fact-finder (see, Gonzalez v City of New York, 148 AD2d 668, 670). The evidence before the jury was sufficient for it to rationally find in the plaintiff’s favor (see, Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 499). Friedmann, J. P., Florio, Luciano and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cashwell v. City of New York, 281 A.D.2d 444, 721 N.Y.S.2d 556, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2383 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

281 A.D.2d 444 (Cashwell v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related