From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lopez v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 2, 1986
121 A.D.2d 369 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

June 2, 1986

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bernstein, J.).


Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

A jury found that the defendant New York City Health Hospitals Corp. was negligent for failing to transport the victim of a gunshot wound to the hospital in an expedient manner, but that such negligence was not the proximate cause of his death. The plaintiff's expert testified that the deceased had a better than 75% chance of surviving the injury which damaged the aorta and caused massive internal bleeding, if treatment had begun within 15 minutes of the injury. The defendants' expert disagreed and gave his opinion that the victim died within 2 to 5 minutes from the massive bleeding. It was the jury's proper function to assess the credibility of the witnesses and to resolve the conflicting testimony, including the divergent expert opinions (see, Felt v. Olson, 51 N.Y.2d 977). On the record before us, we find that there is no basis for overturning the jury's verdict (see, Busby v. Malone, 54 A.D.2d 572).

Further, the trial court's dismissal of the plaintiff's cause of action against the City of New York for its alleged delay in responding to a 911 call was not error. Lazer, J.P., Bracken, Weinstein and Eiber, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Lopez v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 2, 1986
121 A.D.2d 369 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

Lopez v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:JOSE A. LOPEZ, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Jun 2, 1986

Citations

121 A.D.2d 369 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

Stark v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth.

Discussion As a rule, it is the prerogative of the jury to assess the credibility of witnesses, to resolve…

Scott v. Mason

We disagree. It is the proper function of the jury to assess the credibility of witnesses, to resolve…