From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Miller v. Almadovar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 5, 2004
6 A.D.3d 405 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2003-04591.

Decided April 5, 2004.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schneier, J.), dated May 9, 2003, which, upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $80,000.

Robert P. Tusa (Sweetbaum Sweetbaum, Lake Success, N.Y. [Marshall D. Sweetbaum] of counsel), for appellants.

Vanchieri Ferrier, LLP, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Carl V. Grassullo of counsel), for respondent.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendants' contention, the plaintiff's proof was sufficient to show that her injuries were caused by the motor vehicle accident with the defendants, which occurred on July 19, 1995 ( see Matott v. Ward, 48 N.Y.2d 455, 459, 461; People v. Bethune, 105 A.D.2d 262; cf. Andre v. Seem, 234 A.D.2d 325). Thus, the verdict in favor of the plaintiff was based on legally sufficient evidence, as the evidence presented at the trial provided a rational basis for the jury determination ( see Cohen v. Hallmark Cards, 45 N.Y.2d 493, 499).

The defendants' remaining contentions are without merit.

SANTUCCI, J.P., FLORIO, SCHMIDT and MASTRO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Miller v. Almadovar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 5, 2004
6 A.D.3d 405 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Miller v. Almadovar

Case Details

Full title:MARIA TERMINI MILLER, respondent, v. BAAYORK ALMADOVAR, ET AL.…

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

Date published: Apr 5, 2004

Citations

6 A.D.3d 405 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
774 N.Y.S.2d 380