Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Lydia MARTINEZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, Defendant-Respondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered June 14, 2006, dismissing the complaint upon a jury verdict in defendant's favor, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff was injured when she fell while exiting defendant's bus. At the bifurcated trial, plaintiff maintained that defendant's bus driver negligently closed the doors on her before she could get off the bus, and defendant's position was that plaintiff slipped and fell while descending the stairs leading to the exit. The jury determined that defendant's driver was negligent, but that his negligence was not a proximate cause of the accident. Plaintiff argues that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence and inconsistent.
The contention that the verdict was inconsistent is unpreserved, since plaintiff's counsel did not raise it until the jury had already been discharged (see Barry v. Manglass, 55 N.Y.2d 803, 447 N.Y.S.2d 423, 432 N.E.2d 125 [1981] ), and we decline to review it. In any event, the verdict was both based on a fair interpretation of the evidence (see McDermott v. Coffee Beanery, Ltd., 9 A.D.3d 195, 206, 777 N.Y.S.2d 103 [2004] ), and could be reconciled with a reasonable view of the evidence (see Miglino v. Supermarkets Gen. Corp., 243 A.D.2d 451, 662 N.Y.S.2d 818 [1997] ). The record reveals that while there was evidence that defendant's driver was negligent in failing to properly monitor the rear stairwell as the passengers were disembarking, there was also eyewitness testimony that plaintiff slipped on the wet stairs as she started to exit the bus.
Plaintiff's statement in Spanish to the EMS worker that she had slipped on the stairs was contained in translation in the ambulance call report, and was introduced in evidence as an admission. Defendant established that plaintiff was the source of this statement, and that its translation was accurate (see Quispe v. Lemle & Wolff, Inc., 266 A.D.2d 95, 96, 698 N.Y.S.2d 652 [1999] ). Also properly admitted as a spontaneous declaration was testimony that at the time plaintiff fell, a male passenger exclaimed that she “slipped” (Flynn v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Tr. Operating Auth., 94 A.D.2d 617, 619, 462 N.Y.S.2d 17 [1983], affd. 61 N.Y.2d 769, 473 N.Y.S.2d 154, 461 N.E.2d 291 [1984] ).
We have considered plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: June 12, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)