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.
Joseph Fratello, respondent, v. County of Suffolk, et al., appellants.
Argued—May 10, 2012
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Rebolini, J.), dated June 23, 2011, which, upon a jury verdict finding that the defendants were not negligent, granted the plaintiff's motion pursuant to CPLR 4404(a) to set aside the verdict as contrary to the weight of the evidence and for a new trial.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
A jury verdict should not be set aside as contrary to the weight of the evidence unless the jury could not have reached the verdict by any fair interpretation of the evidence (see Lolik v. Big v. Supermarkets, 86 N.Y.2d 744; Cohen v. Hallmark Cards, 45 N.Y.2d 493, 498; Nicastro v. Park, 113 A.D.2d 129). The jury's determination that the defendant bus driver, Thomas Wilson, was not negligent was contrary to the weight of the evidence. The evidence adduced at trial demonstrated that Wilson violated Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1122(a) by traveling on the shoulder of Montauk Highway and overtaking vehicles proceeding in the same direction while passing on the right. A violation of the Vehicle and Traffic Law constitutes negligence as a matter of law (see Vainer v. DiSalvo, 79 AD3d 1023; Botero v. Erraez, 289 A.D.2d 274).
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiff's motion pursuant to CPLR 4404(a) to set aside the verdict as contrary to the weight of the evidence and for a new trial.
ANGIOLILLO, J.P., FLORIO, BELEN and CHAMBERS, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Aprilanne Agostino
Clerk of the Court
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.
Docket No: 2011–08145 (Index No. 20536 /06)
Decided: June 13, 2012
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)