| Sliwowski v City of New York |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 00339 [113 AD3d 749] |
| January 22, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Zbigniew Sliwowski et al., Appellants, v City ofNew York, Respondent. (And a Third-Party Action.) |
—[*1] Cartafalsa, Slattery, Turpin & Lenoff, New York, N.Y. (Edward J. White ofcounsel), for respondent.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal froman order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaughan, J.), dated June 13, 2012, whichdenied their motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) to set a jury verdict in favor of thedefendant on the issue of liability as contrary to the weight of the evidence and for a newtrial.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
A jury verdict should only be set aside as against the weight of the evidence whenthe verdict could not have been reached on any fair interpretation of the evidence (seeLolik v Big V Supermarkets, 86 NY2d 744, 745 [1995]). "A jury's finding that aparty was at fault but that such fault was not a proximate cause of the accident isinconsistent and against the weight of the evidence only when the issues are soinextricably interwoven as to make it logically impossible to find negligence without alsofinding proximate cause" (Garrett v Manaser, 8 AD3d 616, 617 [2004]; see Niebles v MTA Bus Co.,110 AD3d 1047, 1047 [2013]; Spero v Awasthi Ltd. Partners, 106 AD3d 988, 989[2013]).
Here, contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, they failed to demonstrate that the issuesof negligence and proximate cause were so inextricably interwoven as to make itlogically impossible to find negligence without also finding proximate cause (seegenerally Niebles v MTA Bus Co., 110 AD3d at 1047; Spero v Awasthi Ltd.Partners, 106 AD3d at 989). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied theplaintiffs' motion pursuant to CPLR 4404 (a) to set aside the verdict as contrary to theweight of the evidence and for a new trial.
The plaintiffs' remaining contentions have been rendered academic by ourdetermination, are without merit, or are not properly before this Court. Mastro, J.P.,Cohen, Miller and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.