The recent Appellate Division, First Department decision in Pavlou v. City of New York involves an incredibly interesting discussion concerning appellate review of jury verdicts.  The case arises out of a construction site accident in which a crane on a flatbed collapsed after attempting to carry a steel plate that weighed in excess of that allowed under the State Industrial Code. 

The seriously injured plaintiff commenced an action against the City of New York (the site’s owner) under, among other statutes, Labor Law sec. 241(6) for violation of the specific State Industrial Code concerning maximum weight loads for cranes.  The City, in turn, commenced an action against the plaintiff’s employer for contribution and indemnity based on its negligent maintenance of the crane; allegations existed that the crane had a crack in it before the accident.

The Majority and Dissenting opinions grapple with the jury verdict in which the jury found that the City’s violation of the Labor Law was not a substantial cause of the accident but asserted 99% liability against the employer (a third-party plaintiff), even though the jury asserted no liability against the direct parties.

Thank you once again to Michael Hutter for calling my attention to this great case.