Konopacki v. Helena Rubinstein, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Konopacki v. Helena Rubinstein, Inc.

5 A.D.2d 785, 170 N.Y.S.2d 643, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7233

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

DecidedJanuary 20, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 5 A.D.2d 785 (Konopacki v. Helena Rubinstein, Inc.) 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

Konopacki v. Helena Rubinstein, Inc., 5 A.D.2d 785, 170 N.Y.S.2d 643, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7233 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

Action by an employee of a subcontractor on a building under construction to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been received when a ladder on which he was standing slipped, and he was precipitated therefrom, against Brown & Matthews, Inc., the general contractor, and Helena Rubinstein, Inc., the owner of the building. The owner served a cross complaint for judgment over against the general contractor. At the end of the entire case the court dismissed the complaint as against the owner and dismissed its cross complaint. The jury rendered a verdict for $45,000 in favor of the employee against the general contractor. The general contractor appeals from so much of the judgment entered thereon as is in favor of respondent against it. Judgment [786]*786reversed and a new trial granted, with, eosts to abide the event, unless respondent, within 15 days after entry of the order hereon, stipulate to reduce the verdict to $20,000, in which event the judgment, as so reduced, is unanimously affirmed, insofar as appealed from, without costs. In the light of all the proof the verdict was grossly excessive.

Wenzel, Acting P. J., Beldock, Murphy, Ughetta and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

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

Action by an employee of a subcontractor on a building under construction to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been received when a ladder on which he was standing slipped, and he was precipitated therefrom, against Brown & Matthews, Inc., the general contractor, and Helena Rubinstein, Inc., the owner of the building. The owner served a cross complaint for judgment over against the general contractor. At the end of the entire case the court dismissed the complaint as against the owner and dismissed its cross complaint. The jury rendered a verdict for $45,000 in favor of the employee against the general contractor. The general contractor appeals from so much of the judgment entered thereon as is in favor of respondent against it. Judgment [786]*786reversed and a new trial granted, with, eosts to abide the event, unless respondent, within 15 days after entry of the order hereon, stipulate to reduce the verdict to $20,000, in which event the judgment, as so reduced, is unanimously affirmed, insofar as appealed from, without costs. In the light of all the proof the verdict was grossly excessive.

Wenzel, Acting P. J., Beldock, Murphy, Ughetta and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 A.D.2d 785, 170 N.Y.S.2d 643, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7233, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/konopacki-v-helena-rubinstein-inc-nyappdiv-1958.