DiMicelli v. Mccormack

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

DiMicelli v. Mccormack

3 A.D.3d 547, 770 N.Y.S.2d 641, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 721

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

DecidedJanuary 26, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 3 A.D.3d 547 (DiMicelli v. Mccormack) 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

DiMicelli v. Mccormack, 3 A.D.3d 547, 770 N.Y.S.2d 641, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 721 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Owen, J.), dated April 11, 2003, which, after a jury trial, denied her motion pursuant to CFLR 4404 to set aside a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiffs and for judgment in her favor dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

[548]*548A jury verdict is not supported by legally sufficient evidence when “there is simply no valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which could possibly lead rational [people] to the conclusion reached by the jury on the basis of the evidence presented at trial” (Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 499 [1978]). Contrary to the defendant’s contention, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs (see Alexander v Eldred, 63 NY2d 460, 464 [1984]), the plaintiffs established that the defendant wholly or in part created the dangerous condition which caused the injured plaintiff to fall (cf. Bernstein v City of New York, 69 NY2d 1020, 1022 [1987]). Moreover, the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (cf. Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 132-135 [1985]).

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Santucci, J.P., Schmidt, Adams and Crane, 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 defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Owen, J.), dated April 11, 2003, which, after a jury trial, denied her motion pursuant to CFLR 4404 to set aside a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiffs and for judgment in her favor dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

[548]*548A jury verdict is not supported by legally sufficient evidence when “there is simply no valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which could possibly lead rational [people] to the conclusion reached by the jury on the basis of the evidence presented at trial” (Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 499 [1978]). Contrary to the defendant’s contention, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs (see Alexander v Eldred, 63 NY2d 460, 464 [1984]), the plaintiffs established that the defendant wholly or in part created the dangerous condition which caused the injured plaintiff to fall (cf. Bernstein v City of New York, 69 NY2d 1020, 1022 [1987]). Moreover, the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (cf. Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 132-135 [1985]).

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Santucci, J.P., Schmidt, Adams and Crane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 A.D.3d 547, 770 N.Y.S.2d 641, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 721, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dimicelli-v-mccormack-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack