From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Amachee v. Mohammed

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 23, 2008
57 A.D.3d 812 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 2008-02644.

December 23, 2008.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant New York City Transit Authority appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Steinhardt, J.), dated January 31, 2008, as denied that branch of its motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) which was to set aside a jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff and against it on the issue of liability and for judgment as a matter of law.

Wallace D. Gossett, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Lawrence Heisler of counsel), for appellant.

Thomas Ram, New York, N.Y., for respondent.

Before: Rivera, J.P., Angiolillo, Eng and Belen, JJ. concur.


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

When a party moves pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) to set aside a verdict as unsupported by legally sufficient evidence and for judgment as a matter of law, the court must determine "whether 'there is simply no valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which could possibly lead rational [people] to the conclusion reached by the jury on the basis of the evidence presented at trial'" ( Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44, 48-49, quoting Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 499; see Raugalas v Chase Manhattan Corp., 305 AD2d 654, 655). Here, there was adequate evidence in the trial record to support either of two competing versions of the accident — one in which a truck negligently backed into a bus owned and operated by the defendant New York City Transit Authority (hereinafter NYCTA), and the other in which the bus negligently struck the rear of the truck while attempting to maneuver around it. Accordingly, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff ( see Alexander v Eldred, 63 NY2d 460, 464; Lauria v City of New York, 52 AD3d 577, 578; Campos v Ofman, 49 AD3d 485, 486), it simply cannot be said that the verdict against NYCTA was "utterly irrational" ( Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 499) so as to warrant setting it aside and entering judgment in favor of NYCTA.


Summaries of

Amachee v. Mohammed

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 23, 2008
57 A.D.3d 812 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

Amachee v. Mohammed

Case Details

Full title:SAMUEL AMACHEE, Respondent, v. JOHN RAM MOHAMMED et al., Defendants, and…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 23, 2008

Citations

57 A.D.3d 812 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 10108
869 N.Y.S.2d 608

Citing Cases

Powell v. Town of Hempstead

Additionally, no evidence was presented demonstrating the applicability of either of the exceptions to the…

Perez v. 2246 Holding Corp.

These contentions are without merit. When a party moves pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) to set aside a verdict as…