Grimes v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Grimes v. City of New York

309 A.D.2d 898, 766 N.Y.S.2d 111, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11080

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

DecidedOctober 27, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 309 A.D.2d 898 (Grimes v. City of New York) 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

Grimes v. City of New York, 309 A.D.2d 898, 766 N.Y.S.2d 111, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11080 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kangs County (Belen, J.), entered April 24, 2002, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendant New York City Housing Authority and against them on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contentions, the court’s charge to the jury, taken as a whole (see Price v New York City Hous. Auth., 92 NY2d 553 [1998]), properly instructed the jury on the applicable legal standards (see Novikova v Greenbriar Owners Corp., 258 AD2d 149 [1999]; Burgos v Aqueduct Realty Corp., 92 NY2d 544 [1998]).

Furthermore, the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129 [1985]). Ritter, J.P., Florio, S. Miller and Luciano, 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, the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kangs County (Belen, J.), entered April 24, 2002, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendant New York City Housing Authority and against them on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contentions, the court’s charge to the jury, taken as a whole (see Price v New York City Hous. Auth., 92 NY2d 553 [1998]), properly instructed the jury on the applicable legal standards (see Novikova v Greenbriar Owners Corp., 258 AD2d 149 [1999]; Burgos v Aqueduct Realty Corp., 92 NY2d 544 [1998]).

Furthermore, the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129 [1985]). Ritter, J.P., Florio, S. Miller and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

309 A.D.2d 898, 766 N.Y.S.2d 111, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11080, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grimes-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack