Wright v. Sykes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wright v. Sykes

254 A.D.2d 412, 678 N.Y.S.2d 911, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11061

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

DecidedOctober 19, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 254 A.D.2d 412 (Wright v. Sykes) 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

Wright v. Sykes, 254 A.D.2d 412, 678 N.Y.S.2d 911, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11061 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to re[413]*413cover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Ruby Sykes, Metropolitan Suburban Bus Authority, and County of Nassau appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Brien, J.), dated October 3, 1996, as, upon a jury verdict finding them to be 50% at fault in the happening of the accident, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $975,000.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The verdict on the issue of liability was not against the weight of the evidence. The proof adduced at trial established that on July 22, 1992, the plaintiff was a passenger in a van traveling in the middle lane of the three westbound lanes of Stewart Avenue in Garden City, New York. The appellants’ bus, which was in the right-hand lane, moved into the middle lane and collided with the van in which the plaintiff was riding. On impact, the van flipped onto its side and slid along the roadway until it hit a telephone pole. The appellants raise multiple claims of error relative to, inter alia, the propriety of the court’s admission of certain evidence while excluding other evidence, and the utterance of certain “inflammatory” remarks by the plaintiff’s counsel. To the extent that these contentions are preserved for appellate review, they are devoid of merit. Miller, J. P., Thompson, Friedmann and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to re[413]*413cover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Ruby Sykes, Metropolitan Suburban Bus Authority, and County of Nassau appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Brien, J.), dated October 3, 1996, as, upon a jury verdict finding them to be 50% at fault in the happening of the accident, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $975,000.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The verdict on the issue of liability was not against the weight of the evidence. The proof adduced at trial established that on July 22, 1992, the plaintiff was a passenger in a van traveling in the middle lane of the three westbound lanes of Stewart Avenue in Garden City, New York. The appellants’ bus, which was in the right-hand lane, moved into the middle lane and collided with the van in which the plaintiff was riding. On impact, the van flipped onto its side and slid along the roadway until it hit a telephone pole. The appellants raise multiple claims of error relative to, inter alia, the propriety of the court’s admission of certain evidence while excluding other evidence, and the utterance of certain “inflammatory” remarks by the plaintiff’s counsel. To the extent that these contentions are preserved for appellate review, they are devoid of merit. Miller, J. P., Thompson, Friedmann and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D.2d 412, 678 N.Y.S.2d 911, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11061, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wright-v-sykes-nyappdiv-1998.