McCartney Stucky Secures Appellate Victory Granting New Trial for Injured Worker
McCartney Stucky LLC recently achieved a significant appellate victory in the New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, obtaining a new trial for the firm’s client, in a products liability case against Crown Equipment Corporation.
The Third Department’s October 23, 2025 decision reversed the prior jury verdict that had been entered in favor of the defendant and remitted the matter for a new trial, finding that the trial court had abused its discretion in admitting unreliable expert testimony and improperly restricting the testimony of the plaintiff’s experts.
Background of the Case
The plaintiff in this action was seriously injured while operating a stand-up forklift manufactured by Crown Equipment Corporation when, due to defects in design of the machine’s braking system, the machine impacted a pole and the collision resulted in the traumatic amputation of his left leg. McCartney Stucky filed suit alleging that the forklift was defectively designed and that Crown knew or should have known of the dangers associated with its use.
After a multi-week trial in Broome County Supreme Court, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Crown. McCartney Stucky appealed, arguing that the trial court had improperly admitted defense expert testimony and unduly restricted the testimony of the plaintiff’s medical and economic experts. The Third Department agreed.
Court Finds Improper Admission of Defense Expert Testimony
The Appellate Division held that the trial court erred in permitting the defendant’s statistical expert to present comparative data based on a broad and dissimilar category of “industrial truck and tractor operator” accidents, rather than accidents involving the specific type of forklift at issue. The Court concluded that the defendant failed to establish that these accidents occurred under substantially similar conditions, rendering the comparison inadmissible and prejudicial.
Because this testimony went directly to “the central issue to be resolved at trial”—whether the forklift was defectively designed—the Court determined that the error was not harmless and that a new trial was required.
Plaintiff’s Expert Testimony Was Improperly Limited
The Third Department also agreed with McCartney Stucky that the trial court abused its discretion by striking and limiting portions of the testimony of the plaintiff’s medical rehabilitation/life care planning expert and economist. The Court found that the plaintiff’s life care planner, a physician specializing in physical medicine and rehabilitation, had provided competent medical testimony regarding the long-term consequences of plaintiff’s amputation and the inevitable overuse injuries he would experience.
Based on the Dr.’s testimony, the Court held that plaintiff’s economist, Paul Thomas, should have been permitted to testify fully about the projected costs of future medical care. The appellate panel concluded that this testimony was supported by competent evidence and that the limitations imposed by the trial court were improper.
New Trial Ordered
Finding that these combined errors deprived the plaintiff of a fair trial, the Appellate Division reversed the judgment, vacated the jury verdict, and remitted the matter for a new trial in Broome County Supreme Court.
A Win for Fairness and Accountability
This ruling represents far more than a procedural correction — it stands as a victory for fairness, accountability, and perseverance in the pursuit of justice. The Third Department’s decision ensures that the plaintiff will have the opportunity to present his case before a new jury, free from the influence of improper and unreliable evidence.
For McCartney Stucky, the decision underscores the firm’s dedication to standing by their clients at every stage of the litigation process, even after an initial setback. Where others might have accepted defeat, McCartney Stucky pressed forward, identifying key legal errors and persuasively advocating for their client’s right to a fair trial.
This outcome highlights what sets McCartney Stucky apart: a combination of trial strength, legal experience, and unwavering commitment to achieving justice. The firm takes pride in fighting for clients whose voices might otherwise be silenced and ensuring that corporate defendants are held to account for the safety of their products and conduct.
Standing Up for Clients at Every Stage
McCartney Stucky LLC is proud to have secured this appellate victory on behalf of their client and looks forward to presenting his case again before a new jury. The firm remains steadfast in its mission to pursue justice for those harmed by dangerous products, negligent conduct, and corporate indifference.
If you or a loved one has suffered a serious injury and need attorneys who will go the distance — from trial through appeal — contact McCartney Stucky LLC today. The firm’s team of experienced lawyers is ready to fight for your rights and ensure you receive the fair trial and full recovery you deserve.
📞 Contact McCartney Stucky LLC at (914) 305-5555 or visit www.mccartneystucky.com to schedule a consultation.
Case Citation: Johns v. Crown Equipment Corporation, 2025 NY Slip Op 05432 (3d Dept Oct. 23, 2025).
Attorneys for Plaintiff-Appellant: McCartney Stucky LLC (Austin T. Osborn).