Smith v. J.C. Penney Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Smith v. J.C. Penney Co.

300 A.D.2d 466, 750 N.Y.S.2d 897

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

DecidedDecember 16, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 300 A.D.2d 466 (Smith v. J.C. Penney Co.) 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

Smith v. J.C. Penney Co., 300 A.D.2d 466, 750 N.Y.S.2d 897 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Kitson, J.), entered April 17, 2001, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendant and against him, dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The plaintiff failed to object to that part of the jury charge which he challenges on this appeal. Accordingly, he did not preserve this issue for appellate review (see CPLR 4017, 4110-b, 5501 [a] [3]; Surjnarine v Brathwaite, 290 AD2d 436; Cavuto v Lilledah, 161 AD2d 853). In any event, the plaintiff’s contention is without merit.

The plaintiff’s remaining contention is also without merit. Ritter, J.P., Friedmann, Luciano and H. Miller, 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, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Kitson, J.), entered April 17, 2001, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the defendant and against him, dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The plaintiff failed to object to that part of the jury charge which he challenges on this appeal. Accordingly, he did not preserve this issue for appellate review (see CPLR 4017, 4110-b, 5501 [a] [3]; Surjnarine v Brathwaite, 290 AD2d 436; Cavuto v Lilledah, 161 AD2d 853). In any event, the plaintiff’s contention is without merit.

The plaintiff’s remaining contention is also without merit. Ritter, J.P., Friedmann, Luciano and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

300 A.D.2d 466, 750 N.Y.S.2d 897, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-jc-penney-co-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack