McIntosh v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McIntosh v. City of New York

13 A.D.3d 421, 785 N.Y.S.2d 701, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15203

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

DecidedDecember 13, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 13 A.D.3d 421 (McIntosh 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

McIntosh v. City of New York, 13 A.D.3d 421, 785 N.Y.S.2d 701, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15203 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Ponterio, J.), dated June 18, 2003, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendants and against them, dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contentions, the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. A jury verdict in favor of a defendant should not be set aside unless “the jury could not have reached its verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence” (Delgado v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Greenburgh & Mt. Pleasant, 65 AD2d 547 [1978], affd 48 NY2d 643 [1979]; see Hersh v Diekmann, 264 [422]*422AD2d 815, 816 [1999]; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 134 [1985]). A fair basis existed for the verdict in the defendants’ favor.

The plaintiffs’ contentions concerning alleged defects in the jury charge and the verdict sheet are unpreserved for appellate review (see CPLR 4017, 4110-b, 5501 [a] [3]; De Long v County of Erie, 60 NY2d 296, 306 [1983]; Loboda v VJV Dev. Corp., 296 AD2d 441 [2002]; Surjnarine v Brathwaite, 290 AD2d 436 [2002]; Schmidt v Buffalo Gen. Hosp., 278 AD2d 827, 828 [2000]). In any event, the errors, if any, were not so fundamental in nature as to warrant a new trial (see Schmidt v Buffalo Gen. Hosp., supra; Pagnella v Action for a Better Community, 57 AD2d 1076 [1977]; cf. Caceres v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 74 AD2d 619, 620 [1980]). Smith, J.P., Luciano, Crane and Rivera, 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, Richmond County (Ponterio, J.), dated June 18, 2003, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendants and against them, dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contentions, the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. A jury verdict in favor of a defendant should not be set aside unless “the jury could not have reached its verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence” (Delgado v Board of Educ. of Union Free School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Greenburgh & Mt. Pleasant, 65 AD2d 547 [1978], affd 48 NY2d 643 [1979]; see Hersh v Diekmann, 264 [422]*422AD2d 815, 816 [1999]; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 134 [1985]). A fair basis existed for the verdict in the defendants’ favor.

The plaintiffs’ contentions concerning alleged defects in the jury charge and the verdict sheet are unpreserved for appellate review (see CPLR 4017, 4110-b, 5501 [a] [3]; De Long v County of Erie, 60 NY2d 296, 306 [1983]; Loboda v VJV Dev. Corp., 296 AD2d 441 [2002]; Surjnarine v Brathwaite, 290 AD2d 436 [2002]; Schmidt v Buffalo Gen. Hosp., 278 AD2d 827, 828 [2000]). In any event, the errors, if any, were not so fundamental in nature as to warrant a new trial (see Schmidt v Buffalo Gen. Hosp., supra; Pagnella v Action for a Better Community, 57 AD2d 1076 [1977]; cf. Caceres v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 74 AD2d 619, 620 [1980]). Smith, J.P., Luciano, Crane and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 A.D.3d 421, 785 N.Y.S.2d 701, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15203, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcintosh-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack