Tornabene v. Glorioso
110 A.D.2d 631, 487 N.Y.S.2d 120, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48531
Opinion
Upon examining all of the proof adduced at the trial, including the incredible testimony of plaintiff’s son that he could not photograph the dangerous condition of the steps within hours after the accident because the condition, created by an extremely prolonged period of neglect, had been remedied within those few hours, we find that the verdict was contrary to the weight of the credible evidence (see, Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493; Oleksik v Jones, 41 AD2d 692). Thompson, J. P., Bracken, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Tornabene v. Glorioso, 110 A.D.2d 631, 487 N.Y.S.2d 120, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48531 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).
110 A.D.2d 631 (Tornabene v. Glorioso) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Cohen v. Hallmark Cards, Inc.
382 N.E.2d 1145 (New York Court of Appeals, 1978)
Oleksik v. Jones
41 A.D.2d 692 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1973)