Gayle v. City of New York
| Decision Date | 20 October 1998 |
| Citation | 680 N.Y.S.2d 900,92 N.Y.2d 936,703 N.E.2d 758 |
| Parties | , 703 N.E.2d 758, 1998 N.Y. Slip Op. 8885 Kenneth GAYLE et al., Appellants, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Respondent, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and the matter remitted to the Appellate Division for consideration of the facts and issues raised but not determined on appeal to that Court.
Plaintiff Kenneth Gayle was injured when his car skidded on a wet roadway and collided with a parked trailer. There were no eyewitnesses to the accident, and, as a result of injuries sustained in the accident, Gayle had a limited recollection of the accident. Relying primarily on circumstantial evidence, plaintiffs argued that a large puddle formed on the roadway due to defendant's negligence in maintaining a proper drainage system and that this was a proximate cause of the accident. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiffs and absolved plaintiff Kenneth Gayle of all negligence. In a 3-2 decision, the Appellate Division reversed the judgment and dismissed the complaint, finding that plaintiffs failed to meet their burden of proof, as charged by the trial court, on the issue of proximate cause. The majority concluded that "[t]here are many other just as plausible variables and factors which could have caused or contributed to the accident * * * none of which were ruled out by the plaintiffs" (Gayle v. City of New York, 247 A.D.2d 431, 668 N.Y.S.2d 693).
The Appellate Division erred in determining that plaintiffs were required to rule out all plausible variables and factors that could have caused or contributed to the accident. Plaintiffs need not positively exclude every other possible cause of the accident. Rather, the proof must render those other causes sufficiently "remote" or "technical" to enable the jury to reach its verdict based not upon speculation, but upon the logical inferences to be drawn from the evidence (see, Schneider v. Kings Highway Hosp. Ctr., 67 N.Y.2d 743, 744, 500 N.Y.S.2d 95, 490 N.E.2d 1221). A plaintiff need only prove that it was "more likely" (id., at 745, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Williams v. Kfc Nat. Management Co.
... ... Timothy E. Shanley, St. John & Wayne, L.L.C., New York, NY, for Defendant-Appellee ... Before: NEWMAN, CALABRESI, and B.D. PARKER, ... City of Schenectady, 85 N.Y.2d 310, 315, 624 N.Y.S.2d 555, 648 N.E.2d 1318 (1995). When considering the ... Similarly, in Gayle v. City of New York, 92 N.Y.2d 936, 680 N.Y.S.2d 900, 703 N.E.2d 758 (1998), the Court of Appeals ... ...
-
Bee v. Novartis Pharm. Corp.
... ... No. 12–CV–1421 (JFB)(WDW). United States District Court, E.D. New York. Signed May 9, 2014 ... Motion denied ... [18 F.Supp.3d 273] ... See Capobianco v. City of New York, 422 F.3d 47, 50–51 (2d Cir.2005). Unless otherwise noted, where a party's 56.1 ... ‘more reasonable’ that the alleged injury was caused by the defendant's negligence.” Gayle v. City of New York, 92 N.Y.2d 936, 937, 680 N.Y.S.2d 900, 703 N.E.2d 758 (1998) (citations and ... ...
- Bee v. Novartis Pharm. Corp.
-
Brown v. BK 418 LLC
...Hwy. Hosp. Ctr., 67 N.Y.2d at 744, 500 N.Y.S.2d 95, 490 N.E.2d 1221 [interna 1 quotation marks omitted]; see Gayle v. City of New York, 92 N.Y.2d 936, 937, 680 N.Y.S.2d 900, 703 N.E.2d 758). "Rather, [the plaintiff's] proof must render those other causes sufficiently 'remote' or 'technical'......
-
Expert witnesses
...of subject areas in which expert testimony has been found admissible are as follows: Accident reconstruction Gayle v. City of New York , 92 N.Y.2d 936, 680 N.Y.S.2d 900 (1998). Plaintif ’s accident reconstruction expert could testify, based on plaintif ’s father’s testimony as to physical i......
-
Expert witnesses
...of subject areas in which expert testimony has been found admissible are as follows: Accident reconstruction Gayle v. City of New York , 92 N.Y.2d 936, 680 N.Y.S.2d 900 (1998). Plaintif ’s accident reconstruction expert could testify, based on plaintif ’s father’s testimony as to physical i......
-
Expert witnesses
...of subject areas in which expert testimony has been found admissible are as follows: Accident reconstruction Gayle v. City of New York, 92 N.Y.2d 936, 680 N.Y.S.2d 900 (1998). Plaintiff’s accident reconstruction expert could testify, based on plaintiff’s father’s testimony as to physical fi......
-
Expert witnesses
...of subject areas in which expert testimony has been found admissible are as follows: Accident reconstruction Gayle v. City of New York , 92 N.Y.2d 936, 680 N.Y.S.2d 900 (1998). Plaintif ’s accident reconstruction expert could testify, based on plaintif ’s father’s testimony as to physical i......