DeLuca v. Bensonhurst Grocery

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

DeLuca v. Bensonhurst Grocery

303 A.D.2d 541, 756 N.Y.S.2d 458

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

DecidedMarch 17, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 303 A.D.2d 541 (DeLuca v. Bensonhurst Grocery) 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

DeLuca v. Bensonhurst Grocery, 303 A.D.2d 541, 756 N.Y.S.2d 458 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants Bensonhurst Grocery and Shayer Ahmid Said appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Huttner, J.), entered January 30, 2002, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiffs and against them in the principal sum of $302,077.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the appellants’ contentions, the jury verdict finding that the injured plaintiff was negligent, but that her negligence was not a proximate cause of the accident, was not against the weight of the evidence, as the jury’s finding was supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129 [1985]; Campbell v Crimi, 267 AD2d 343, 344 [1999]). Under the facts of this case, the issues were not “ ‘so inextricably interwoven as to make it logically impossible to find negligence without also finding proximate cause’ ” (Reese v New York City Bd. of Educ., 297 AD2d 793 [2002], quoting Rubin v Pecoraro, 141 AD2d 525, 527 [1988]; cf. Ferrante v County of Nassau, 301 AD2d 565 [2003]).

The appellants’ remaining contentions are without merit. Feuerstein, J.P., Friedmann, Schmidt and Mastro, 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 defendants Bensonhurst Grocery and Shayer Ahmid Said appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Huttner, J.), entered January 30, 2002, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiffs and against them in the principal sum of $302,077.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the appellants’ contentions, the jury verdict finding that the injured plaintiff was negligent, but that her negligence was not a proximate cause of the accident, was not against the weight of the evidence, as the jury’s finding was supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence (see Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129 [1985]; Campbell v Crimi, 267 AD2d 343, 344 [1999]). Under the facts of this case, the issues were not “ ‘so inextricably interwoven as to make it logically impossible to find negligence without also finding proximate cause’ ” (Reese v New York City Bd. of Educ., 297 AD2d 793 [2002], quoting Rubin v Pecoraro, 141 AD2d 525, 527 [1988]; cf. Ferrante v County of Nassau, 301 AD2d 565 [2003]).

The appellants’ remaining contentions are without merit. Feuerstein, J.P., Friedmann, Schmidt and Mastro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

303 A.D.2d 541, 756 N.Y.S.2d 458, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deluca-v-bensonhurst-grocery-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack