Spencer v. Store

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Spencer v. Store

184 A.D.2d 321

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

DecidedJune 16, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 184 A.D.2d 321 (Spencer v. Store) 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

Spencer v. Store, 184 A.D.2d 321 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J., and a jury), entered July 22, 1991, in favor of plaintiff and against defendant in the amount of $146,000 exclusive of interest and costs, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

According wide deference to the fact finder’s assessment of credibility and drawing all factual inferences in favor of plaintiff, the successful litigant (1 Newman, New York Appellate Practice § 4.08), we find that the verdict is rational, and does not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation (CPLR 5501 [c]). Plaintiff clearly established a prima facie case (see, Derdiarian v Felix Contr. Corp., 51 NY2d 308, 314-315), and the court properly charged res ipsa loquitur (Corcoran v Banner Super Mkt., 19 NY2d 425, 431-432; Richardson, Evidence § 93 [Prince 10th ed]). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J., and a jury), entered July 22, 1991, in favor of plaintiff and against defendant in the amount of $146,000 exclusive of interest and costs, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

According wide deference to the fact finder’s assessment of credibility and drawing all factual inferences in favor of plaintiff, the successful litigant (1 Newman, New York Appellate Practice § 4.08), we find that the verdict is rational, and does not deviate materially from what would be reasonable compensation (CPLR 5501 [c]). Plaintiff clearly established a prima facie case (see, Derdiarian v Felix Contr. Corp., 51 NY2d 308, 314-315), and the court properly charged res ipsa loquitur (Corcoran v Banner Super Mkt., 19 NY2d 425, 431-432; Richardson, Evidence § 93 [Prince 10th ed]). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

184 A.D.2d 321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spencer-v-store-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack