Opinion
November 10, 1970
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County entered on October 21, 1969, unanimously reversed on the law, and a new trial is directed, with $50 costs and disbursements to the appellant to abide the event. In this jury action for personal injuries, the complaint was dismissed at the close of the proof. A question of fact was presented by the testimony on which the jury might have found plaintiff's coworker gave a new two by four wood plank to Imperial's foreman who was in the shaft at the sixth floor at the time; while plaintiff was working in the shaft, Imperial's foreman "yelled below" to plaintiff and his coworker thus indicating a warning of the fall of the plank. The plank was subsequently identified as the one which had been given to Imperial's foreman. There is further proof that prior to the accident Imperial's employees had removed a part of the plywood coverings of the shaft at the second and sixth floors in preparation for dropping guide wires. It is sufficient if plaintiff shows facts and conditions from which the negligence of the defendant and the causation of the accident by that negligence may be reasonably inferred. Circumstantial evidence is deemed sufficient if it supports the inference of causation even though it does not negative the existence of remote possibilities that the injuries were not caused by the defendant or that the defendant was not negligent. ( Spett v. President Monroe Bldg. Mfg. Corp., 19 N.Y.2d 203, 205.)
Concur — McGivern, J.P., Markewich, McNally and Macken, JJ.