Doherty v. King Kullen Grocery Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Doherty v. King Kullen Grocery Co.

261 A.D.2d 568, 688 N.Y.S.2d 912, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5693

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

DecidedMay 24, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 261 A.D.2d 568 (Doherty v. King Kullen Grocery Co.) 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

Doherty v. King Kullen Grocery Co., 261 A.D.2d 568, 688 N.Y.S.2d 912, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5693 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Berler, J.), entered May 8, 1998, which, upon a determination of the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 4401 made at the close of trial for judgment in its favor as a matter of law, is in favor of the defendant and against them, dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment in its favor as a matter of law. Viewing the evidence presented in the .light most favorable to the plaintiffs, and giving them every reasonable inference which may properly be drawn therefrom, there was no rational process by which the jury could have found that the defendant created the condition which caused the injured plaintiff to fall (see, Szczerbiak v Pilat, 90 NY2d 553, 556). Any such finding by the jury in the instant case would have been based upon speculation, rather than logical inferences drawn from the evidence (see, Bradish v Tank Tech Corp., 216 AD2d 505, 506; Thomas v New York City Tr. Auth., 194 AD2d 663; Fleming v Kings Ridge Recreation Park, 138 AD2d 451).

The plaintiffs’ remaining contention has not been preserved [569]*569for appellate review (see, Pochrov Ministries v Long Is. Light. Co., 221 AD2d 610; Volpe v Good Samaritan Hosp., 213 AD2d 398). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman, Florio and H. Miller, 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 plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Berler, J.), entered May 8, 1998, which, upon a determination of the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 4401 made at the close of trial for judgment in its favor as a matter of law, is in favor of the defendant and against them, dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment in its favor as a matter of law. Viewing the evidence presented in the .light most favorable to the plaintiffs, and giving them every reasonable inference which may properly be drawn therefrom, there was no rational process by which the jury could have found that the defendant created the condition which caused the injured plaintiff to fall (see, Szczerbiak v Pilat, 90 NY2d 553, 556). Any such finding by the jury in the instant case would have been based upon speculation, rather than logical inferences drawn from the evidence (see, Bradish v Tank Tech Corp., 216 AD2d 505, 506; Thomas v New York City Tr. Auth., 194 AD2d 663; Fleming v Kings Ridge Recreation Park, 138 AD2d 451).

The plaintiffs’ remaining contention has not been preserved [569]*569for appellate review (see, Pochrov Ministries v Long Is. Light. Co., 221 AD2d 610; Volpe v Good Samaritan Hosp., 213 AD2d 398). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman, Florio and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D.2d 568, 688 N.Y.S.2d 912, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5693, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doherty-v-king-kullen-grocery-co-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack