Exarhouleas v. Green 317 Madison, LLC

46 A.D.3d 854, 847 N.Y.S.2d 866
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 26, 2007
StatusPublished
Cited by70 cases

This text of 46 A.D.3d 854 (Exarhouleas v. Green 317 Madison, LLC) 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
Exarhouleas v. Green 317 Madison, LLC, 46 A.D.3d 854, 847 N.Y.S.2d 866 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Cullen, J.), dated July 20, 2006, as, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendants TGI Friday’s, Inc., and National 42nd St. Realty, Inc., on the issue of liability, and upon the denial of their motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) to set aside the jury verdict, is in favor of those defendants and against them dismiss[855]*855ing the complaint insofar as asserted against those defendants, and the defendants TGI Friday’s, Inc., and National 42nd St. Realty, Inc., separately appeal from so much of the same judgment as is in favor of the defendant Green 317 Madison, LLC, and against them dismissing their cross claims.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

A jury verdict should not be set aside as against the weight of the evidence unless the jury could not have reached the verdict by any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Lolik v Big V Supermarkets, 86 NY2d 744, 746 [1995]; Harris v Marlow, 18 AD3d 608, 610 [2005]; Torres v Esaian, 5 AD3d 670, 671 [2004]). Whether a jury verdict should be set aside as contrary to the weight of the evidence does not involve a question of law, but rather requires a discretionary balancing of many factors (see Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 498 [1978]). It is for the jury to make determinations as to the credibility of the witnesses, and great deference in this regard is accorded to the jury, which had the opportunity to see and hear the witnesses (see Bertelle v New York City Tr. Auth., 19 AD3d 343 [2005]; Corcoran v People’s Ambulette Serv., 237 AD2d 402, 403 [1997]).

Here, the jury’s determination that the defendants TGI Friday’s, Inc., and National 42nd St. Realty, Inc., were not negligent was not against the weight of the evidence.

The plaintiffs’ remaining contention is without merit.

In light of the foregoing, the Supreme Court properly dismissed, as academic, the cross claim asserted by the defendants TGI Friday’s, Inc., and National 42nd St. Realty, Inc., against the defendant Green 317 Madison, LLC. Crane, J.P., Rivera, Florio and Balkin, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Thomas v. Hudson Group HG Retail, LLC
217 A.D.3d 990 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)
Fernandez v. Taping Expert, Inc.
210 A.D.3d 651 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
Mendoza v. Enchante Accessories, Inc.
2020 NY Slip Op 3775 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Baker v. City of White Plains
2019 NY Slip Op 1382 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Vatalaro v. County of Suffolk
2018 NY Slip Op 5351 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Harewood v. Holmes
2018 NY Slip Op 5144 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Shellkopf v. Bernfeld
2018 NY Slip Op 4768 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Agostino v. L & M Bus Co.
2018 NY Slip Op 4297 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Peterson v. MTA
2017 NY Slip Op 7761 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Pierre v. Andre
2017 NY Slip Op 5253 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Fasolas v. Bobcat of New York, Inc.
2017 NY Slip Op 2777 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Yanyak v. Rosenman
134 A.D.3d 817 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Daniel v. Thomas
132 A.D.3d 720 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Semo v. McMahon
128 A.D.3d 1048 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Raso v. Jamdar
126 A.D.3d 776 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
KBL, LLP v. Community Counseling & Mediation Services
123 A.D.3d 488 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Henriquez v. Rovt
122 A.D.3d 680 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Figueroa v. HLM Electric, Ltd.
121 A.D.3d 1038 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Messina v. Staten Island University Hospital
121 A.D.3d 867 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Williams v. New York City Transit Authority
121 A.D.3d 780 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
46 A.D.3d 854, 847 N.Y.S.2d 866, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/exarhouleas-v-green-317-madison-llc-nyappdiv-2007.