Legal Opinion · Dissent

Perales v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 27, 2000Published

1DissentFriedman, J.

It has long been the rule that an instruction on the question of comparative negligence should be given to a jury when there is *351any valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences that could possibly lead a rational person to conclude that the plaintiff was negligent (see, Nallan v Helmsley-Spear, Inc., 50 NY2d 507, 517; Wartels v County Asphalt, 29 NY2d 372, 379). Supreme Court, in rejecting defendant’s request to submit the issue to the jury, violated this well-established principle.

On January 22, 1994, plaintiff had been at his uncle’s home when he decided to go out and buy a pair of…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Nallan v. Helmsley-Spear, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. People v. SteeleNew York Court of Appeals · 1970
  3. Wartels v. County Asphalt, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1972
  4. Morgan v. GenrichAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
  5. National Bank of North America v. Systems Home Improvement, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1980

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API