Armstrong v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth.
| Decision Date | 14 January 2015 |
| Parties | Geneve ARMSTRONG, respondent, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
124 A.D.3d 570
1 N.Y.S.3d 285
Geneve ARMSTRONG, respondent,
v.
NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Jan. 14, 2015.
Lawrence Heisler, Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellant.
Eaton & Torrenzano, LLP, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Jay Torrenzano of counsel), for respondent.
JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, J.P., CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, L. PRISCILLA HALL, and COLLEEN D. DUFFY, JJ.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Steinhardt, J.), entered October 31, 2013, which, after the denial of its motion pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law on the issue of liability, made at the close of evidence, and upon a jury verdict, is in favor of the plaintiff and against it in the principal sum of $325,000.
ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law on the issue of liability is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.
The plaintiff was a passenger on the defendant's bus when it allegedly stopped in a manner that caused her to fall and sustain personal injuries. The plaintiff commenced this action against the defendant, alleging that it was negligent. At the trial, at the close of the evidence on the issue of liability, the defendant moved pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law on the issue of liability. The Supreme Court denied the motion, and, after a trial on damages, entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
To be awarded judgment as a matter of law pursuant to CPLR 4401, a defendant must show that there is no rational process by which the jury could find for the plaintiff against the moving defendant (see Szczerbiak v. Pilat, 90 N.Y.2d 553, 556, 664 N.Y.S.2d 252, 686 N.E.2d 1346 ;
Garcia...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Alleyne v. Grant
...93 A.D.3d at 729, 939 N.Y.S.2d 879 ).A referee derives authority from an order of reference by the court (see CPLR 4311, 4317 ; Matter of 124 A.D.3d 570Rivera v. Arocho, 120 A.D.3d 1350, 1351, 992 N.Y.S.2d 559 ; Matter of Aslan v. Senturk, 116 A.D.3d 952, 983 N.Y.S.2d 815 ; Fernald v. Vinci......
-
Vitale v. Astoria Energy II, LLC
...may be drawn from the evidence, or where the credibility of the witnesses is in question’ " ( Armstrong v. New York City Tr. Auth., 124 A.D.3d 570, 571, 1 N.Y.S.3d 285, quoting Cathey v. Gartner, 15 A.D.3d 435, 436, 790 N.Y.S.2d 200 ). Labor Law § 200 is a codification of the common-law dut......
- People v. Azor
-
Cioffi v. Klein
...may be drawn from the evidence, or where the credibility of the witnesses is in question’ ” (Armstrong v. New York City Tr. Auth., 124 A.D.3d 570, 571, 1 N.Y.S.3d 285, quoting Cathey v. Gartner, 15 A.D.3d 435, 436, 790 N.Y.S.2d 200 ). “ ‘[A] contractual obligation, standing alone, will gene......