Sicignano v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sicignano v. New York City Transit Authority

126 A.D.3d 595, 3 N.Y.S.3d 594

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

DecidedMarch 24, 2015

Docket110337/10 14592 14591

StatusPublished

This text of 126 A.D.3d 595 (Sicignano v. New York City Transit Authority) 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

Sicignano v. New York City Transit Authority, 126 A.D.3d 595, 3 N.Y.S.3d 594 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol E. Huff, *596 J.), entered April 30, 2014, after a jury trial, in favor of defendant New York City Transit Authority (defendant), unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered December 12, 2013, which denied plaintiffs’ posttrial motion to set aside the verdict as against the weight of the evidence, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.

The jury’s verdict — that defendant’s violations of the Administrative Code of the City of New York were not reasonably connected to plaintiff firefighter’s injury — was a fair interpretation of the evidence (see Lolik v Big v Supermarkets, 86 NY2d 744, 746 [1995]). While defendant did not call an expert to rebut plaintiffs’ expert’s opinion as to causation, “the jury is entitled to accept, or reject, an expert’s testimony in whole or in part” (McDermott v Coffee Beanery, Ltd., 9 AD3d 195, 207 [1st Dept 2004]). In addition, the jury was free to accept or reject plaintiffs account of the accident.

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Sweeny, Gische and Kapnick, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol E. Huff, *596 J.), entered April 30, 2014, after a jury trial, in favor of defendant New York City Transit Authority (defendant), unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered December 12, 2013, which denied plaintiffs’ posttrial motion to set aside the verdict as against the weight of the evidence, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.

The jury’s verdict — that defendant’s violations of the Administrative Code of the City of New York were not reasonably connected to plaintiff firefighter’s injury — was a fair interpretation of the evidence (see Lolik v Big v Supermarkets, 86 NY2d 744, 746 [1995]). While defendant did not call an expert to rebut plaintiffs’ expert’s opinion as to causation, “the jury is entitled to accept, or reject, an expert’s testimony in whole or in part” (McDermott v Coffee Beanery, Ltd., 9 AD3d 195, 207 [1st Dept 2004]). In addition, the jury was free to accept or reject plaintiffs account of the accident.

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Sweeny, Gische and Kapnick, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

126 A.D.3d 595, 3 N.Y.S.3d 594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sicignano-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack