JORDAN v. CEMUSA NY LLC MTA (2025)

Recitation as per CPLR §§ 2219(a) and/or 3212(b) of papers considered on review of this motion:

NYSCEF Doc #s 456-458; 477-480 by City D's

NYSCEF Doc #s 460-476 by Plaintiff

Upon the foregoing cited papers and after oral argument on June 3, 2025, pursuant to CPLR § 4404(a), for the reasons stated below, the motion by Defendants Cemusa NY LLC, Cemusa Inc.¹ , Cemusa Inc.² and the City of New York's (“City”), seeking to set aside the verdict in this matter, is hereby DENIED in its entirety.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff commenced this personal injury action by filing a summons and complaint on or about March 8, 2016.³ A trial was held in March 2023. Following post-trial motion practice, the Court set aside the damages verdict as contrary to the weight of the evidence.⁴ A retrial on the issues of damages was subsequently held from April 1, 2025 through April 9, 2025.

On April 9, 2025, the jury returned a unanimous verdict, awarding Plaintiff:

• $600,000 for past pain and suffering (from the date of injury to the date of the verdict),

• $1,000,000 for future pain and suffering (over a 25-year period),

• $100,699 for past medical expenses, and

• $318,020 for future medical expenses.5

Defendants made an oral application to set aside the verdict, which the Court denied on April 9, 2025. Among other grounds, Defendants now move to set aside the verdict as excessive.⁶

STANDARD OF REVIEW

CPLR § 4404(a) permits the Court to set aside a jury verdict where it is “․ contrary to the weight of the evidence, in the interest of justice or where the jury cannot agree after being kept together for as long as is deemed reasonable by the court.” CPLR § 4404.

A jury verdict should not be set aside as against the weight of the evidence unless it “could not have been reached on any fair interpretation of the evidence.” Schuster v. Sourour, 207 AD3d 491, 492 (2d Dept. 2022); see Lolik v. Big V Supermarkets, 86 NY2d 744, 764 (1995). The jury is afforded “great deference” in its credibility determinations, having had the opportunity to observe and hear the witnesses firsthand. Lopreiato v. Scotti, 101 AD3d 829, 830 (2d Dept. 2012) (quoting Jean-Louis v. City of NY, 86 AD3d 628, 629 [2d Dept. 2011]).

A verdict may also be set aside in the interest of justice based on trial errors, including evidentiary rulings, improper jury instructions, misconduct, newly discovered evidence, or surprise.” Allen v. Uh, 82 AD3d 1025, 1025 (2d Dept. 2011).

Additionally, CPLR § 4405 requires that a motion to set aside a jury verdict be made within 15 days of the verdict, absent a showing of good cause for delay. Galarza v. Heaney, 204 AD3d 759 (2d Dept. 2022); Rozmarin v. Sookhoo, 172 AD3d 1415 (2d Dept. 2019). A meaningful review of such a motion generally requires submission of the trial transcript. Gorbea v. Decohen, 118 AD3d 548 (1st Dept. 2014).

DISCUSSION

The Court finds Defendants’ motion is procedurally defective and substantively unpersuasive.

First, the motion is untimely. The jury rendered its verdict on April 9, 2025. Defendants filed the instant motion on May 2, 2025—23 days later—without demonstrating good cause for the delay. See Galarza, 204 AD3d at 761.

Second, Defendants’ oral application to set aside the verdict was denied on April 9, 2025, and they have not timely moved to reargue or renew that decision.

Third, Defendants failed to attach the trial transcript to their motion papers, thereby depriving the Court of a meaningful opportunity to review the record. See Gorbea, 118 AD3d at 549.

Therefore, the Defendant's motion is hereby denied in its entirety.

This constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Cemusa NY LLC, Cemusa Inc. is now known as JCDecaux Street Furniture New York, LLC.

2.   Cemusa Inc. is now known as JCDecaux Street Furniture, Inc.

3.   NYSCEF Doc. # 1.

4.   NYSCEF Doc. # 329.

5.   NYSCEF Doc. # 461.

6.   NYSCEF Doc. # 456.

Patria Frias-Colón, J.