D'Annunzio v. Ore

• Decision Date: 02 July 2014
• Citation: 2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 04892,119 A.D.3d 512,989 N.Y.S.2d 503
• Parties: Lauren D'ANNUNZIO, plaintiff-respondent, v. Russell A. ORE, et. al., appellants, Daniel Lorence Goldman, et al., defendants-respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

119 A.D.3d 512

989 N.Y.S.2d 503

2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 04892

Lauren D'ANNUNZIO, plaintiff-respondent,

v. Russell A. ORE, et. al., appellants,Daniel Lorence Goldman, et al., defendants-respondents.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

July 2, 2014.

Jacobson & Schwartz, LLP, Jericho, N.Y. (Paul Goodovitch of counsel), for appellants.

Abamont & Associates (Congdon, Flaherty, O'Callaghan, Reid, Donlon, Travis & Fishlinger, Uniondale, N.Y. [Kathleeen D. Foley], of counsel), for defendants-respondents.

WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P., JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, PLUMMER E. LOTT, and ROBERT J. MILLER, JJ.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Russell A. Ore and Eastern Wholesale Fence Co., Inc., appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bruno, J.), entered April 8, 2013, which granted the motion of the defendants Daniel Lorence Goldman and Benjamin Goldman pursuant to CPLR 4404(a) to set aside a jury verdict on the issue of liability as inconsistent and for a new trial.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

“ ‘When a jury's verdict is internally inconsistent, the trial court must direct either reconsideration by the jury or a new trial’ ” ( Kelly v. Greitzer, 83 A.D.3d 901, 902, 921 N.Y.S.2d 302, quoting Palmer v. Walters, 29 A.D.3d 552, 553, 814 N.Y.S.2d 689;seeCPLR 4111[c]; Marine Midland Bank v. Russo Produce Co., 50 N.Y.2d 31, 40, 427 N.Y.S.2d 961, 405 N.E.2d 205). Here, contrary to the appellants' contention, the jury's verdict was internally inconsistent because the jury attributed 30% of the fault in the happening of the subject motor vehicle accident to the defendant Russell A. Ore, despite having found that Ore's negligence was not a substantial factor in causing the plaintiff's injuries ( see Kelly v. Greitzer, 83 A.D.3d at 902, 921 N.Y.S.2d 302;Dubec v. New York City Hous. Auth., 39 A.D.3d 410, 411, 834 N.Y.S.2d 165;Palmer v. Walters, 29 A.D.3d at 553, 814 N.Y.S.2d 689). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the motion of the defendants Daniel Lorence Goldman and Benjamin Goldman pursuant to CPLR 4404(a) to set aside the verdict on the issue of liability and for a new trial.