Rodriguez v. Sam Wu

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rodriguez v. Sam Wu

248 A.D.2d 184, 669 N.Y.S.2d 812, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2395

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

DecidedMarch 10, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 248 A.D.2d 184 (Rodriguez v. Sam Wu) 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

Rodriguez v. Sam Wu, 248 A.D.2d 184, 669 N.Y.S.2d 812, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2395 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered August 23, 1996, which, after a jury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $150,000, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was struck by á falling ladder while entering the business premises of appellant’s decedent. There was evidence at trial that the ladder that struck plaintiff was the property of appellant’s decedent, and that it had shortly before the accident been used to paint a sign above the entrance to his store. There was also evidence that subsequent to the sign painting, the ladder had been allowed to remain insecurely against the storefront at a point proximate to the path of entering customers. From this evidence, the jury, employing “the logic of common experience itself’ could reasonably have drawn the inferences necessary to assign liability as it did (see, Schneider v Kings Highway Hosp. Ctr., 67 NY2d 743, 745).

We have examined defendant’s other contentions and find them to be unpreserved or without merit.

Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rubin and Tom, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered August 23, 1996, which, after a jury trial, awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $150,000, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was struck by á falling ladder while entering the business premises of appellant’s decedent. There was evidence at trial that the ladder that struck plaintiff was the property of appellant’s decedent, and that it had shortly before the accident been used to paint a sign above the entrance to his store. There was also evidence that subsequent to the sign painting, the ladder had been allowed to remain insecurely against the storefront at a point proximate to the path of entering customers. From this evidence, the jury, employing “the logic of common experience itself’ could reasonably have drawn the inferences necessary to assign liability as it did (see, Schneider v Kings Highway Hosp. Ctr., 67 NY2d 743, 745).

We have examined defendant’s other contentions and find them to be unpreserved or without merit.

Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Rubin and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

248 A.D.2d 184, 669 N.Y.S.2d 812, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2395, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rodriguez-v-sam-wu-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack