From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Briccio v. Disbrow

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 14, 1995
212 A.D.2d 565 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

February 14, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Beisner, J.).


Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

A jury's verdict may only be set aside as being against the weight of the evidence when there was no basis upon which the jury could have reached its verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence (Catanzaro v. King Kullen Grocery Co., 194 A.D.2d 584; Nicastro v. Park, 113 A.D.2d 129). In the instant case, there was ample testimony from which the jury could reasonably conclude that the plaintiff pedestrian was crossing Route 9, outside of any designated crosswalk and without looking for oncoming traffic to her right, when she was hit by the defendants' car. Therefore, even though the defendant Brenna M. Disbrow was negligent, the plaintiff's actions were the sole proximate cause of the accident (see also, Moskowitz v. Israel, 209 A.D.2d 676). Bracken, J.P., Balletta, Copertino and Hart, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Briccio v. Disbrow

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 14, 1995
212 A.D.2d 565 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Briccio v. Disbrow

Case Details

Full title:GEMMA BRICCIO, Appellant, v. JOHN R. DISBROW et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Feb 14, 1995

Citations

212 A.D.2d 565 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
622 N.Y.S.2d 561

Citing Cases

Manna v. Hubbard

A verdict should not be set aside as contrary to the weight of the evidence unless it is palpably wrong or…

Lowes v. Anas

On those facts, defendants contend that decedent violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1152 (a). Consequently,…