Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993

Catanzaro v. King Kullen Grocery Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided June 7, 1993

194 A.D.2d 584; 599 N.Y.S.2d 74; 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5974

Cases that cite this one

15 later published cases cite this decision.

Rose v. Da Ecib USA (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)
Clark v. Stop & Shop Supermarket Co., LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
Alaimo v. Sam's East, Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 2021)
Gonzalez v. New York City Transit Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
Tsekhanovskaya v. Starrett City, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
Villaurel v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
Ascher v. Target Corp. (District Court, E.D. New York 2007)
Field v. Waldbaum, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
Torres v. Jeremias (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2001)
Salaam v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1996)
Gordon v. Waldbaum, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1996)
Briccio v. Disbrow (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
Young v. Whitman Deli, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
Kaufman v. Man-Dell Food Stores, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1994)
Moskowitz v. Israel (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1994)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Kutner, J.), dated February 21, 1991, which denied its motion to set aside the jury verdict in favor of the plaintiffs.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In this case, the plaintiff Joanne Catanzaro slipped and fell on a puddle containing glass while shopping in the defendant’s grocery store. After a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs, the Trial Judge refused to set aside the verdict as against the weight of the evidence. We agree. A verdict may only be set aside as against the weight of the evidence when there is no basis upon which a jury could have reached the verdict on any fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129; Moore v Health Ins. Plan, 186 AD2d 118).

Here, the evidence adduced at trial shows that although the plaintiff, her husband, and another customer, were in the store approximately one-half hour before the accident, they did not hear any sounds of breaking glass. Moreover, the other customer was in the immediate vicinity of the accident for approximately 10 minutes before the accident. In addition, there were several employees working in the vicinity of the spillage, and the injured plaintiff’s husband testified that the footprints and wheel marks in the area surrounding the puddle were both wet and dry. There was no testimony establishing that this area of the floor was inspected any *585sooner than four to five hours before the accident. Thus, there was sufficient evidence from which the jury could impute constructive notice to the defendant. Balletta, J. P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Joy, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.