Piazza v. Corporate Builders Group, Inc.

73 A.D.3d 1006, 900 N.Y.S.2d 673
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 18, 2010
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 73 A.D.3d 1006 (Piazza v. Corporate Builders Group, 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
Piazza v. Corporate Builders Group, Inc., 73 A.D.3d 1006, 900 N.Y.S.2d 673 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruchels-man, J.), dated December 11, 2008, which denied that branch of their motion which was pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) to set aside a jury verdict on the issue of liability in favor of the defendants as contrary to the weight of the evidence and for a new trial.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

A jury verdict should not be set aside as contrary to the weight of the evidence unless the jury could not have reached the verdict by any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Lolik v [1007]*1007Big V Supermarkets, 86 NY2d 744, 746 [1995]; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 134 [1985]). 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, 499 [1978]; Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d at 133). Applying these principles to the facts in this case, we find that the verdict was supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence, and it was not contrary to the weight of the evidence.

Any error in charging the jury on the issue of the emergency doctrine was harmless (see Shalot v Schneider Natl. Carriers, Inc., 57 AD3d 885, 886 [2008]). The plaintiffs’ remaining contention is without merit. Rivera, J.P., Dillon, Florio and Balkin, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Gaspard v. Aronoff
2017 NY Slip Op 6258 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Walker v. New York City Transit Authority
115 A.D.3d 941 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Schwartz v. Nagori
115 A.D.3d 733 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Sokolik v. Pateman
114 A.D.3d 839 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Amajie v. Muchai
109 A.D.3d 852 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Doran v. McNulty
107 A.D.3d 843 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Verizon New York, Inc. v. Orange & Rockland Utilities, Inc.
100 A.D.3d 983 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Geary v. Church of St. Thomas Aquinas
98 A.D.3d 646 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Jean-Louis v. City of New York
86 A.D.3d 628 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Johnson v. White
85 A.D.3d 977 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Bermudez v. New York City Board of Education
83 A.D.3d 878 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Guclu v. 900 Eighth Avenue Condominium, LLC
81 A.D.3d 592 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Woody v. Foot Locker Retail, Inc.
79 A.D.3d 740 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Hendrickson v. Dynamic Medical Imaging, P.C.
78 A.D.3d 999 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Grullon v. West 48th Street Redevelopment Corp.
75 A.D.3d 621 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
73 A.D.3d 1006, 900 N.Y.S.2d 673, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/piazza-v-corporate-builders-group-inc-nyappdiv-2010.