Summary
In Wright v. Riverbay Corp., 82 A.D.3d 444, 917 N.Y.S.2d 864 [2011], a case directly on point, this Court recently reversed a judgment because the lower court failed to charge the jury on comparative negligence.
Summary of this case from Johnson v. N.Y. City Transit Auth.Opinion
No. 4428.
March 3, 2011.
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Patricia Anne Williams, J.), entered August 12, 2009, after a jury trial, awarding plaintiff damages, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the judgment vacated, and the matter remanded for a new trial on the issue of whether plaintiff was comparatively negligent.
Armienti, DeBellis, Guglielmo Rhoden, LLP, New York, (Vanessa M. Corchia of counsel), for appellant.
Robin G. Neiger, Bronx (Jeffrey Zeichner of counsel), for respondent.
Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Acosta, DeGrasse, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
Contrary to defendant's objection to the jury charge and the other rulings of the court that placed the burden on defendant to show that it did not have notice of the absence of lights in the stairwell, plaintiffs evidence that a lack of illumination in violation of Multiple Dwelling Law § 37 was a proximate cause of his accident shifted the burden to defendant on the issue of notice ( see Santiago v New York City Hous. Auth., 268 AD2d 203).
Defendant's request for a jury charge on comparative negligence should have been granted given the issue of whether plaintiff should have entered and descended an unlit stairwell under the facts of this case.
Defendant's remaining arguments concerning various evidentiary rulings and the jury charge on the Multiple Dwelling Law are unpreserved for appellate review.