Raffa v. Central School District No. 1

16 A.D.2d 855, 227 N.Y.S.2d 723, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9906
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 9, 1962
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 16 A.D.2d 855 (Raffa v. Central School District No. 1) 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
Raffa v. Central School District No. 1, 16 A.D.2d 855, 227 N.Y.S.2d 723, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9906 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment entered on the verdict of a jury rendered at a Trial Term, Supreme Court, Greene County, and from an order denying a motion to set aside the verdict. Plaintiff paid admission to attend a public basketball game in the school premises owned by the defendant school district and after the game went into the school cafeteria where she bought some food. While seated at a table, the chair gave way and collapsed and she was thrown to the floor, sustaining a herniated intervertebral disc and some injuries to the muscles. Since the chair was in the full control of the defendant and furnished to the plaintiff as a business invitee on the premises, a prima facie showing of negligence was made out when it was shown that the chair collapsed in ordinary use by the plaintiff (Reinzi v. Tilyou, 252 N. Y. 97; Goodacre v. Roovers Bros., 254 App. Div. 764; Lusk v. Peck, 132 App. Div. 426). Although a question of fact arose as to whether or not there should be a recovery, and the case was properly submitted to the jury, the verdict for defendant is against the weight of the evidence in view of the collapse of the defendant’s chair, unexplained by it, and the absence of any negligence shown in the way the plaintiff used the chair. On this issue there should, in our view of the record, be a new trial. There was, however, no basis for the motion by plaintiff for a new trial based on a purported untruthful answer by a juror on preliminary examination of the jury and on a purported statement by one of the jurors after the trial. The Judge was entirely right in denying a motion to set aside the verdict on those grounds. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial ordered, with costs to abide the event. Bergan, P. J., Coon, Gibson, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Draper v. State of New York
2021 NY Slip Op 04163 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)
Finocchio v. Crest Hollow Club at Woodbury, Inc.
184 A.D.2d 491 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
Kowalski v. Loblaws, Inc.
61 A.D.2d 340 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1978)
Gresham v. Stouffer Corp.
241 S.E.2d 451 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1978)
Hunter v. Alfina
251 N.E.2d 303 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
16 A.D.2d 855, 227 N.Y.S.2d 723, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9906, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raffa-v-central-school-district-no-1-nyappdiv-1962.