Stokes v. Vales Constr. Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Stokes v. Vales Constr. Corp.

269 A.D.2d 274, 704 N.Y.S.2d 455, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2036

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

DecidedFebruary 22, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 269 A.D.2d 274 (Stokes v. Vales Constr. Corp.) 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

Stokes v. Vales Constr. Corp., 269 A.D.2d 274, 704 N.Y.S.2d 455, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2036 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Lippmann, J.), entered June 12, 1998, which, upon a jury verdict, found defendant Vales Construction Corp. not negligent, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the complaint reinstated against Vales and the matter remanded for a new trial.

The trial court erred when it refused to take “judicial cognizance” of Administrative Code of the City of New York §§ 19-105, 19-106 and 19-107 and to instruct the jury on their meaning and application. The failure to do so deprived plaintiff of a fair trial and this error, standing alone, is sufficient to require reversal of the judgment (Chanler v Manocherian, 151 AD2d 432, 434; McDonald v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 203 AD2d 6). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Mazzarelli, Ellerin and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Lippmann, J.), entered June 12, 1998, which, upon a jury verdict, found defendant Vales Construction Corp. not negligent, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the complaint reinstated against Vales and the matter remanded for a new trial.

The trial court erred when it refused to take “judicial cognizance” of Administrative Code of the City of New York §§ 19-105, 19-106 and 19-107 and to instruct the jury on their meaning and application. The failure to do so deprived plaintiff of a fair trial and this error, standing alone, is sufficient to require reversal of the judgment (Chanler v Manocherian, 151 AD2d 432, 434; McDonald v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 203 AD2d 6). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Mazzarelli, Ellerin and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 A.D.2d 274, 704 N.Y.S.2d 455, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2036, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stokes-v-vales-constr-corp-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack