From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Boolbol v. Paradigm Management Group, LLC

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Nov 22, 2016
144 A.D.3d 577 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)

Opinion

11-22-2016

Jeffrey BOOLBOL, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. PARADIGM MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLC, et al., Defendants–Respondents, RN Realty LLC, Defendant.

Ateshoglou & Aiello, P.C., New York (Steven D. Ateshoglou of counsel), for appellant. Ahmuty, Demers & McManus, Albertson (Glenn A. Kaminska of counsel), for respondents.


Ateshoglou & Aiello, P.C., New York (Steven D. Ateshoglou of counsel), for appellant.

Ahmuty, Demers & McManus, Albertson (Glenn A. Kaminska of counsel), for respondents.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Frank P. Nervo, J.), entered February 3, 2015, upon a jury verdict, in defendants' favor, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The trial court properly ruled that the statement in an ambulance report that plaintiff “lost his footing going down the steps” was inadmissible as a prior consistent statement (see People v. McDaniel, 81 N.Y.2d 10, 18, 595 N.Y.S.2d 364, 611 N.E.2d 265 [1993] ). There was evidence at trial that plaintiff's fall was the result not of an accident but of a voluntary leap down the stairs, but plaintiff's motive to fabricate had arisen at the moment that he landed and hurt himself.

The trial court properly declined to give a missing document charge as to a claimed surveillance videotape and photographs taken by an employee of defendant the Mansion (see Martelly v. New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 276 A.D.2d 373, 714 N.Y.S.2d 64 [1st Dept.2000] ). Plaintiff failed to show that the videotape ever existed. He failed to show that the photographs would be relevant to any disputed factual issue.

In its verdict interrogatories, the trial court properly limited defendants' liability to the absence of handrails on the stairs since there was no evidence to support any other theory of liability (Fallon v. Damianos, 192 A.D.2d 576, 596 N.Y.S.2d 134 [2d Dept.1993], lv. denied 83 N.Y.2d 751, 611 N.Y.S.2d 133, 633 N.E.2d 488 [1994] ).

FRIEDMAN, J.P., SAXE, RICHTER, GISCHE, KAPNICK, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Boolbol v. Paradigm Management Group, LLC

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Nov 22, 2016
144 A.D.3d 577 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
Case details for

Boolbol v. Paradigm Management Group, LLC

Case Details

Full title:Jeffrey BOOLBOL, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. PARADIGM MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLC…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Nov 22, 2016

Citations

144 A.D.3d 577 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 7875
40 N.Y.S.3d 906

Citing Cases

Ross v. City of New York

The incident report merely repeated claims that Cross averred in his deposition testimony. It was therefore…

Annie R. v. City of New York

The incident report merely repeated claims that Cross averred in his deposition testimony. It was therefore…