From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Goldman v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 21, 2004
8 A.D.3d 528 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2003-07703.

Decided June 21, 2004.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Spires, J.), entered July 8, 2003, which, upon a jury verdict in favor of the defendant City of New York and against them, and upon an order of the same court dated March 24, 2003, denying their motion pursuant to CPLR 4404(a) to set aside the verdict as against the weight of the evidence, dismissed the complaint, in effect, insofar as asserted against that defendant. The plaintiffs' notice of appeal from the order dated March 24, 2003, is deemed to be a notice of appeal from the judgment ( see CPLR 5512[a]).

Smith Laquercia, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Thomas Michael Laquercia and Carrie R. Kurzon of counsel), for appellants.

Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York, N.Y. (Leonard Koerner and Elizabeth S. Natrella of counsel), for respondent.

Before: NANCY E. SMITH, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, THOMAS A. ADAMS, PETER B. SKELOS, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

A jury verdict is entitled to great deference and should only be set aside as against the weight of the evidence when it could not have been reached on any fair interpretation of the evidence ( see Lolik v. Big V Supermarkets, 86 N.Y.2d 744, 746; Asaro v. Micali, 292 A.D.2d 552, 553). Contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, a fair interpretation of the evidence supports the verdict in favor of the defendant City of New York. The jury reasonably could have concluded that the Big Apple Pothole Sidewalk Protection Corporation map submitted by the plaintiffs as evidence of the City's prior written notice was illegible and therefore insufficient to bring the particular sidewalk defect at issue to the City's attention ( see Quinn v. City of New York, 305 A.D.2d 570, 571; Vasquez v. City of New York, 298 A.D.2d 187; see also Blas v. R.M.H. Realty Corp., 5 A.D.3d 416; Patane v. City of New York, 284 A.D.2d 513, 514; David v. City of New York, 267 A.D.2d 419).

SMITH, J.P., KRAUSMAN, ADAMS and SKELOS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Goldman v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 21, 2004
8 A.D.3d 528 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Goldman v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:CAROL GOLDMAN, ET AL., appellants, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, respondent, ET…

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

Date published: Jun 21, 2004

Citations

8 A.D.3d 528 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
778 N.Y.S.2d 719

Citing Cases

Vertsberger v. City of N.Y

Moreover, the jury's determination was not against the weight of the evidence as the jury, upon a fair…

O'Brien v. Town of Huntington

. . ." However, a jury verdict should not be set aside as against the weight of the evidence unless the…