Gravina v. John S. Tilley Ladders Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gravina v. John S. Tilley Ladders Co.

155 A.D.2d 585, 547 N.Y.S.2d 602, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14574

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

DecidedNovember 20, 1989

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 155 A.D.2d 585 (Gravina v. John S. Tilley Ladders 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

Gravina v. John S. Tilley Ladders Co., 155 A.D.2d 585, 547 N.Y.S.2d 602, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14574 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garry, J.), entered April 18, 1988, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendant and against them.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The established rule is that a jury verdict will not be set aside as against the weight of the evidence unless the jury could not have reached the verdict it rendered by any fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 499; Passanante v Snyder, 142 AD2d 669; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129). In this case a review of the record indicates that the jury reached its verdict on a fair interpretation of the evidence. Thus, the trial court did not err in refusing to set the verdict aside.

[586]*586The plaintiffs’ remaining contention, that the trial court erred in denying their motion to conduct a portion of the trial at the hospital where Mr. Gravina was a patient, is without merit (see, CPLR 4013; 4 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac fl 4013.01, at 40-41 — 40-42). Mangano, J. P., Lawrence, Hooper and Balletta, JJ., concur.

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

— In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garry, J.), entered April 18, 1988, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendant and against them.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The established rule is that a jury verdict will not be set aside as against the weight of the evidence unless the jury could not have reached the verdict it rendered by any fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 499; Passanante v Snyder, 142 AD2d 669; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129). In this case a review of the record indicates that the jury reached its verdict on a fair interpretation of the evidence. Thus, the trial court did not err in refusing to set the verdict aside.

[586]*586The plaintiffs’ remaining contention, that the trial court erred in denying their motion to conduct a portion of the trial at the hospital where Mr. Gravina was a patient, is without merit (see, CPLR 4013; 4 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac fl 4013.01, at 40-41 — 40-42). Mangano, J. P., Lawrence, Hooper and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

155 A.D.2d 585, 547 N.Y.S.2d 602, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14574, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gravina-v-john-s-tilley-ladders-co-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack